Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Case LawsCustoms
    Decoding the Interplay of Customs Duty, Interest, and Confiscation Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Assessment u/s 153C: Reckoning the Limitation Period
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting 'Initiation' of Penalty Action u/s 275(1)(c): Period of Limitation
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment: Decoding the Exemptions for International Tax Charges
    Interpreting Rule 86A: Safeguarding Taxpayers' Rights in ITC Blocking
    Writ Jurisdiction Not a Shortcut to Bypass Tax Adjudication Process, Rules Court: Judicial Disciplin...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Interplay of Sections 153A and 153C in Search Assessments: Limitation and Reassessment ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Customs Valuation and Classification: Upholding Due Process and Objective Assessment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Income Tax Case Transfers: Place of Business vs. Registered Office: Determining the Appropriate Juri...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Writ Petitions and Section 153C Proceedings: Examining the High Court Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting Time Limits for 80G Registration for Charitable Institutions: Avoiding Absurdity in the...
    Unraveling the Web: Forgery, Fake GST Firms, and the Pursuit of Economic Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interplay between the provisions of Section 153C and Section 147: Limits on Automatic Reassessment i...
    Decoding the GST Forgery Case: Balancing Personal Liberty and Safeguarding Public Interest for Grant...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Equity and Justice in Tax Matters: Condonation of Bona Fide Delays
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Embracing Equity in Tax Laws: Recognizing Genuine Difficulties in Condonation of Delays in filing of...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Recovery Proceedings Against Legal Heirs of Sole Proprietors: Invalidity of Demand Notices Issued Ag...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Jurisdiction of DRI Officers: Supreme Court Upholds Section 97 of Finance Act 2022 validating Custom...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Dissecting the Legality of IGST on Ocean Freight for FOB Imports: Refund of IGST
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Real Income Taxation: Avoiding Double Disallowance of Wages and Salaries Payable
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Customs duty liability on redemption: assessment under Section 28 triggers interest under Section 28AB for delayed payment.
    The court concluded that duty liability arises when an owner redeems confiscated goods under Section 125(2), while the procedural assessment and determination of that duty can be carried out under Section 28, and that the interest provision of Section 28AB applies where Section 28 is invoked for such duties; the Jagdish Cancer ratio does not preclude applying Section 28 in confiscation-redemption assessments.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation under Section 153C: six-year period runs from receipt of seized documents, requiring assessment under Section 153C.
    Where seized assets, documents and digital data recovered from a third party are found to relate to another person, the date on which the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction receives those seized materials is the deemed date of search for reckoning the six-year limitation period; that deemed date determines the relevant assessment year and which prior six assessment years fall under the special procedure for initiating assessments under Section 153C.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Initiation of penalty proceedings: limitation runs from the Assessing Officer's reference, barring belated penalty orders.
    Initiation of penalty proceedings occurs when the Assessing Officer makes a reference to the competent authority; the subsequent show cause notice is a procedural opportunity and does not restart the limitation period, so the statutory limitation for completing penalty proceedings runs from the date of the Assessing Officer's reference and a penalty order passed after that period is time barred.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment procedure must govern issuance of Section 148 notices in international tax matters, irrespective of residency.
    The court held that the plain language of the faceless scheme, Section 144B(2) and the CBDT order requires that issuance of Section 148 notices in matters involving international tax charges comply with the mandatory faceless assessment procedure, irrespective of the taxpayer's residency status, and that notices issued without adherence to that procedure are inconsistent with the statutory scheme.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    ITC blocking under Rule 86A: restricts orders to credit presently available in the electronic credit ledger, limiting retrospective blockage.
    Rule 86A(1) functions as a temporary protective mechanism that may be invoked only where input tax credit is currently available in the taxpayer's electronic credit ledger and the officer has reasons to believe that such present credit has been fraudulently availed or is ineligible; the expression "amount equivalent to such credit" must be read together with the condition of availability in the ECL and does not authorise retrospective blocking of ITC already utilised or refunded.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Exhaustion of statutory remedies prevents direct writ challenges to tax demands absent exceptional circumstances or factual disputes.
    The court held that exhaustion of statutory remedies bars writ relief where efficacious alternate remedies exist and where resolution requires factual or classification inquiries; finding no exceptional circumstances to bypass the statutory process, the court dismissed the writ petitions but granted liberty to the petitioners to pursue statutory remedies, including filing responses to show cause notices or appeals against adjudication orders within the period allowed, subject to compliance with prescribed conditions such as pre-deposit obligations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment limitation: commencement depends on AO's recorded satisfaction, not the search date, for non-searched entities.
    Reassessment of a non-searched entity under Section 153C must be measured from the date the Assessing Officer records satisfaction about the seized material's relevance to that entity, not from the date of the search when the same AO is involved; the proviso to Section 153A(1) prevents the extended limitation period introduced by the 2017 amendment from applying to searches before the statutory cutoff, and physical handover of materials is a machinery provision rather than the substantive commencement trigger.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Transaction value protection: declared import price accepted; principal-use classification of motor controllers affirmed after procedural defects in reassessment were found
    The tribunal upheld the declared transaction value, finding that the authority enhanced assessable value without following statutory procedures and without proving non-comparability; NIDB assessed-value data alone was insufficient. On classification, the motor controllers were held to be parts principally used with electric motors and correctly classed under CTH 8503, with explanatory notes and the principal-use test displacing revenue's attempt to treat them as vehicle accessories.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Place of business controls assessment jurisdiction; transfer permitted where incriminating materials were seized in that jurisdiction.
    When incriminating materials seized in a particular circle are directly connected to an assessee's business activities and essential to assessment, the assessing authority may transfer proceedings to the circle where those materials were seized. The decision emphasizes that place of business-reflecting where operative evidence and activities occurred-can control assessment jurisdiction, and that transfer facilitates a coordinated investigation while procedural safeguards like show cause notices and opportunities to reply remain relevant.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Writ jurisdiction preserved where exceptions to alternative remedies exist; defective Section 153C compliance undermines post-search assessments.
    The court analysed when High Court writ jurisdiction may be exercised despite alternative remedies, reiterating exceptions for violations of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or fundamental rights. It examined Section 153C procedural requirements, particularly the necessity of a valid satisfaction note by the Assessing Officer of the searched person, time limits and jurisdictional competence, and the limited evidentiary value of loose sheets and retracted statements absent corroboration.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Time limits for 80G registration: purposive interpretation prevents existing charities being barred and preserves merit-based verification.
    The Tribunal construed the amended registration scheme to hold that the six month filing period tied to commencement of activities applies to newly formed institutions that have not begun activities, not to existing charities that obtained provisional approval; it required the assessing authority to treat applications filed within six months before provisional approval expiry as within time and to verify eligibility on merits, providing opportunity to supply documents.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Admissibility of custodial disclosures: discovery linked statements can be admitted, shaping jurisdiction and bail in GST fraud cases.
    The summary addresses three operative legal points: admissibility of custodial disclosures limited to parts directly leading to discovery of material items; jurisdictional inquiry in multi state economic offences founded on connections between the complainant, place of lodging the FIR and links to accused and firms; and stringent bail evaluation in large scale economic crimes considering gravity, evidence, punishment, risk of tampering, accused's influence and public interest, applied to a scheme of forged GST firms and bogus invoices.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Non obstante clause in third party search provision applies only after the AO assumes jurisdiction by issuing a notice.
    The Assessing Officer of the other person must record satisfaction that incriminating material relates to that person's total income for specific assessment years before issuing a third party notice; the non obstante clause in the third party provision applies only after the Assessing Officer assumes jurisdiction by issuing such a notice and does not oust regular reassessment provisions where jurisdiction under the third party scheme is not assumed.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Bail in economic offences: stricter scrutiny where circumstantial financial links to proceeds of crime risk investigation and public interest.
    The court examined bail appropriateness where applicants allegedly knowingly received and concealed proceeds from a large-scale GST fraud involving fake registrations and bogus invoices. It treated unexplained transactions as strong circumstantial evidence of complicity and applied a heightened bail regime for serious economic offences, weighing gravity of offence, public fund loss, evidence strength and risk of tampering. Gender or familial ties were held insufficient to justify leniency when individuals are shown to have benefited from proceeds of crime.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: bona fide short technical glitches in filing income tax returns warrant equitable condonation by authorities.
    The High Court held that a one day, bona fide delay in filing an income tax return due to a technical portal glitch could not be rejected merely because the return had been processed with a demand; such reasoning was misconceived. Applying earlier authorities that endorse an empathetic and non rigid approach, the court emphasised that short delays caused by genuine human or technical problems should be condoned in exercise of administrative discretion, reinforcing the primacy of equity and justice in condonation applications for returns.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: personal illness of a tax professional can justify relief in filing income tax returns.
    The summary establishes that under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, delay in filing returns caused by personal difficulties of a chartered accountant (such as illness of a family member) can be a genuine reason for discretionary condonation; authorities should assess such claims sensitively, require reasoned disbelief if rejecting medical evidence, and interpret discretionary tax powers in light of equity, substantial justice and harmonious construction.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Invalidity of notices to deceased persons prevents recovery from legal heirs absent specific statutory machinery enabling continuation.
    Issuance of a demand or show cause notice to a deceased sole proprietor is a jurisdictional defect because notice to the correct person is a condition precedent under the Customs Drawback Rules; absent a statutory machinery provision or voluntary submission by legal representatives, recovery of erroneously availed drawback and penalties cannot be pursued against legal heirs.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdiction of revenue intelligence officers affirmed: legislative validation sustains past customs show cause notices as constitutionally permissible.
    The Court concluded the defect identified in Canon India is unfounded when Notification No. 44/2011 and amended Section 17 are read together, distinguishing assessment functions under Section 17 from recovery under Section 28, and held that Section 97 of the Finance Act, 2022 validly and purposively validates past show cause notices issued by DRI and similarly situated officers, with retrospective application limited to the object of validation and passing Article 14 tests of reasonable classification and proportionality.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    IGST on ocean freight invalid where IGST already paid on import value, preventing double taxation under valuation rules.
    The court held that where IGST has been paid on the value of imported goods inclusive of cost, freight and insurance under Section 5(1) of the IGST Act read with the Customs Act, the CIF/FOB distinction is immaterial and a notification provision seeking separate IGST on ocean freight for FOB imports cannot be sustained, reinforcing fiscal neutrality and preventing double taxation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Timing difference in wage provisions prevents double disallowance; actual payment deductible after reversal.
    Where provisions for wages and salaries are reversed in the return and actual payments are later made and evidenced, those entries represent a timing difference rather than inherently bogus expenditure; treating the same item as disallowable in the earlier year and again disallowing the later payment would result in double disallowance contrary to the taxation of real income.

    TMI Notes

    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters

      Comparison of section 423 "Interest for defaults in furnishing return of income." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      15 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 423 Interest for defaults in furnishing return of income.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Document compared: Section 423 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 (as appearing in the enacted Act) and Clause 423 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) (the Bill text supplied). Both texts deal with interest for defaults in furnishing return of income. The provisions affect taxpayers required to furnish returns, and the income-tax department in calculating and demanding interest. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: Clause 423 in the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version (hereinafter "Clause 423 (Bill)"). Subject matter: interest chargeable for defaults in furnishing return of income. Coverage: outlines when simple interest at the rate implicit in the formula I = 1% x A x T becomes payable, defines the starting and ending dates for computation across specified circumstances, prescribes treatment where post-assessment orders alter tax, and defines components included in "tax paid". Definitions or explanations provided in the text: limited to the formula and the Table; the Bill supplies a definition of "tax paid" in sub-section (4)(d) with enumerated items (i)-(vii). No separate definitions section is provided.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 423 imposes simple interest for defaults in furnishing a return of income. The interest is computed by the formula I = 1% x A x T, where A is the "amount of tax on which interest is payable" (as specified in sub-section (2)) and T is the number of months comprised in the period commencing on the day after the "starting date" and ending on the "ending date" specified in the Table. Sub-section (2) contains a Table that maps specific circumstances to starting date, ending date and the tax base (A) for interest computation. The Table covers four scenarios: (1) return furnished u/s 263(1), (4) or (6) or in response to a notice u/s 268(1) after the due date; (2) no return furnished under the said sections; (3) return required by a notice under an unspecified section issued after certain determinations and furnished late; and (4) where such a notice requires a return and no return is furnished. Sub-section (3) deals with the consequence of orders (under a list of sections) that increase or reduce the tax base for interest, prescribing issuance of notice of demand in prescribed form where interest increases, and refund of excess interest where interest is reduced. Sub-section (4) contains qualifying notes, including exclusions of additional income-tax u/s 267 from the tax bases, reduction of interest payable by amounts of interest paid u/s 266, and the detailed meaning of "tax paid". Sub-section (5) treats an assessment made for the first time u/s 279 as a "regular assessment" for purposes of the section.

      Interpretation

      Legislative intent as indicated by the Bill text: to provide a simple, uniform interest formula for late or non-furnishing of returns and to tie the interest computation periods to concrete events (due date, date of furnishing, date of completion of assessment, dates specified in notices). The Table-driven approach indicates an intent to vary the tax base (A) and the start/end dates according to factual circumstances of how and when returns are filed or not filed. The inclusion of a detailed "tax paid" definition shows an intent to net off various prepayments and credits from the tax base when computing interest. The provision for adjustment upon post-assessment orders (sub-section (3)) manifests an intent to align interest levies with the final assessed tax position.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Carve-outs or qualifications present in the Bill include:

      • Exclusion of additional income-tax u/s 267 from the tax base (4)(a)-(b).
      • Reduction of interest payable by interest already paid u/s 266 (4)(c).
      • Specific items constituting "tax paid" (4)(d)(i)-(vii), which serve as offsets against the tax base for interest calculation.
      • Where an assessment is made for the first time u/s 279, it is to be regarded as a regular assessment (5).

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A return filed late in response to a notice u/s 268(1). Starting date is the due date u/s 263(1); ending date is date of furnishing; A is tax on total income as determined u/s 270(1) (if regular assessment not made) or tax determined under regular assessment, reduced by "tax paid". (All other specifics of amounts and dates Not stated in the document.)
      • Example 2: No return furnished in response to a notice u/s 268(1). Starting date is due date u/s 263(1); ending date is date of completion of assessment u/s 271; A is tax on total income determined under regular assessment reduced by "tax paid". (Concrete amounts and computation Not stated in the document.)
      • Example 3: Return required by a notice (serial number 3) but furnished after expiry of time allowed under such notice. Starting date is the date immediately following the last date of time allowed under such notice (Bill text); ending date is date of furnishing; A is amount by which reassessed tax exceeds earlier tax. (The Bill text contains an omission in the cross-reference to the notice section; specifics Not stated in the document.)

      Interplay

      The Bill text expressly references multiple other provisions (sections 263, 268, 270, 271, 279, 280, 266, 267, 287, 288, 289, 359, 363, 365(10), 368, 377, 378, 206). Interplay with those provisions is central to determining starting/ending dates, the tax base (A), and credits. The Bill, as supplied, contains at least one omitted cross-reference (a missing section number in the Table at serial number 3) and a differing cross-reference for the tax credit clause (206(13) vs the multi-paragraph references in the Act). These differences create potential interpretive issues and could require reconciliation with the substantive provisions of the referenced sections; however, the content of those referenced sections is Not stated in the document.

      Differences between the two provisions and practical impact

      • Starting date for notice-required returns (serial numbers 3 and 4): The enacted Section 423 (Act) uses "The last date of time allowed under such notice" as the starting date for serial numbers 3 and 4. The Clause 423 of Bill (Old Version) uses "Date immediately following the last date of time allowed under such notice" (for both serial numbers 3 and 4 in the Bill).
        • Practical impact: shifting the stated starting date by one day will change the counted months (T) in the formula I = 1% x A x T in some cases; whether the difference produces a material change depends on the method of counting months under the section (not further specified in the documents). It can lead to one additional month being counted in some interpretations, thereby increasing interest liability slightly in some cases.
      • Row 3 starting date wording: In the Act text, for serial number 3 the Starting date is "The last date of time allowed under such notice." The Bill text, for serial number 3, states "Date immediately following the last date of time allowed under such notice."
        • Practical impact: same as above; potential to alter the period used for interest computation.
      • Omissions/typographical differences affecting clarity: The Bill's Table entry for serial number 3 contains an apparent omission - "Where return of income is required by a notice u/s issued after..." (the section number is missing). The Act provides the relevant contextual references (Act shows section 280 in related contexts).
      • Practical impact: omission creates ambiguity in the Bill text about which notice provision is referred to; this could cause interpretive uncertainty unless corrected. The Act text does not exhibit that omission in the supplied extract.
      • "Tax paid" definition - tax credit cross-references: The Act's clause (4)(d)(vii) defines "tax paid" to include "any tax credit allowed to be set off as per sections 206(1)(m) to (p) and 206(2)(e) to (h)." The Bill (Old Version) substitutes "(vii) any tax credit allowed to be set off as per section 206(13)."
        • Practical impact: this is a substantive difference in cross-references. If the Bill's singular reference is intended to capture the same set of credits, the drafting does not make that clear. Depending on the actual content of section 206 in the statute (not stated in the document), taxpayers may lose (or gain) certain credits being treated as "tax paid" for interest computation. As the document supplied does not state the content of section 206, the practical effect cannot be fully determined from the text alone.
      • Form of notice of demand: Sub-section (3)(a) in the Act reads "in such form as may be prescribed"; the Bill reads "in the form as prescribed."
        • Practical impact: stylistic/minor drafting difference; both phrases point to prescribed form, but "such form as may be prescribed" is the more conventional legislative formulation. No clear substantive impact in isolation.
      • Other structural/wording differences: Minor variations in punctuation, paragraphing and referential phrases occur across the two texts (for example, use of "the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice of demand in such form as may be prescribed specifying the sum payable" vs "shall serve on the assessee a notice of demand in the form as prescribed specifying the sum payable").
        • Practical impact: primarily drafting and clarity; no express substantive change beyond the items noted above based on the supplied texts.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: The precise starting date language (whether the last date of time allowed or the day after that date) will affect calculation of months (T) - which could increase or decrease interest by the formula provided. Taxpayers filing in response to notices should be alert to how the start date is to be computed. Where the Bill's cross-references differ (notably to section 206), taxpayers should verify which tax credits count as "tax paid" for interest computations - the Bill text introduces uncertainty. The omission of a section number in serial number 3 may create avoidable disputes until corrected.
      • Record-keeping/evidence points: The text makes clear that dates of notices, dates of furnishing of returns, dates of completion of assessments and amounts of tax determined at various stages are determinative items. Parties should maintain contemporaneous records showing notice dates, time allowed under notices, dates of filing, assessments and any payments or credits claimed (details of records to be kept Not stated in the document).

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 423 (Bill) applies a simple interest formula I = 1% x A x T for defaults in furnishing returns, tying the interest period to specific starting and ending events listed in a Table.
      • There are material drafting differences between the Bill and the enacted Section 423: notably in the exact stated starting dates for notice-driven cases and in the cross-references used to define tax credits included as "tax paid".
      • Shifts in starting date wording (last date vs date immediately following) can alter interest months counted and thus interest liability; the Bill language tends to state the day after, potentially increasing periods in some views.
      • The Bill text contains an omission (missing section reference in serial number 3 of the Table) creating interpretive ambiguity that requires correction or legislative clarification.
      • The Bill lists prescribed mechanisms for adjustment where post-assessment orders alter tax and requires notice of demand or refund accordingly.
      • The provision for reduction of interest by interest already paid u/s 266 and the detailed enumeration of items constituting "tax paid" show an intent to prevent double charging and to net prepayments and credits.

      Full Text:

      Section 423 Interest for defaults in furnishing return of income.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax