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 LawsIncome Tax
    Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS to the Government
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Landmark Judgment on Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS ...
    A Case of Coerced Input Tax Credit Reversal - GST recovery during search and seizure proceedings.
    Manner of compliance of conditions of pre-deposit - Debit of amount from electronic credit ledger (E...
    The need for clarity and concrete reasons in the cancellation of GST registrations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of reopening of assessment - need for a direct link between the portal's information and th...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Application of provisions of section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional release of imported goods (apples) - The dispute centers on the valuation of the import...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Applicability of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of expenses - need for tax authorities to have a practical understanding of the nature ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of the assessee's business expenditure claims related to the purchase of sugarcane from...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Additions made u/s 69 and Section 56 in the absence of direct incriminating evidence linking the ass...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Whether penalty is to be imposed when the appellant has accepted the classification and paid the ent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Liability for payment of customs duty on sale of excess liquor from the duty-free shop
    Case LawsCustoms
    Demand of customs duty beyond normal period of limitation on the ground of change in classification ...
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Stringent approach towards ensuring compliance with auditing standards - importance of auditors' res...
    Whether the appellant's claim can be classified as a Financial Debt or Operational Debt under the In...
    Scope of Approval of resolution plan - Allegations of undervaluation of the Corporate Debtor's asset...
    Denial of Input Tax Credit since the GST registration of the Supplier of Goods has been Cancelled wi...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a vested right or concession - Can government impose conditions or restric...
❯❯
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 LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    TDS credit entitlement affirmed: deductee entitled to credit despite deductor's non-deposit, preventing indirect recovery.
    Credit for tax deducted at source on interest payments is to be treated as tax paid on the deductee's behalf and does not depend on the deductor's remittance; statutory protections against indirect recovery prevent the revenue from seeking the same tax from the deductee when the deductor fails to deposit the deducted amount, and the deposit requirement in the applicable provisions does not negate the deductee's entitlement to such credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax credit for TDS: deductee entitled to credit even if deductor failed to deposit the retained tax with government.
    The Court treats amounts retained by a deductor as remaining tax and concludes the statutory credit mechanism for tax deducted at source does not condition a deductee's entitlement on the deductor having deposited the retained amount with the government, thereby barring indirect recovery or adjustment against the deductee where tax has been deducted at source.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Coercive tax collection prohibited; forced reversal of input tax credit during search deemed impermissible, with investigatory remedies preserved.
    Dispute involved a search under Section 67 and an alleged coerced reversal of Input Tax Credit from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger for supplies from a supplier with retrospectively cancelled registration; the court found such coercive recovery during search impermissible and directed restoration of the ITC while preserving the department's power to investigate and, if ineligible or fraudulent ITC is found, pass appropriate protective orders.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-deposit payment method: Electronic credit ledger debit does not satisfy pre-deposit; cash ledger payment required for appeals.
    Pre-deposit for appeals under the CGST/BGST regime must be paid from the cash ledger; debit from the electronic credit ledger does not satisfy the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A revenue circular restricting ECRL use to certain output tax payments and excluding reverse charge, interest, penalties, fees, and similar amounts supports that ECRL cannot be used for pre-deposit. The court emphasized the statutory payment scheme and strict appeal filing timelines, rejecting arguments that ECRL debit could substitute for cash ledger payment.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Requirement of clear reasons in GST cancellation: retrospective deregistration must be reasoned and consider input tax credit effects.
    Cancellation of GST registration must be supported by clear reasons and concrete factual findings in show cause notices and cancellation orders; labels that a registration is "liable to be cancelled" without specifying dues or factual basis constitute mechanical action. Retrospective cancellation cannot be applied routinely; authorities must follow statutory procedure, assess causes for non-filing, consider exceptional disruptions to business operations, and account for the impact on input tax credit before fixing an effective date of cancellation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use of portal data: digital information needs a direct evidential link before reopening income tax assessments.
    Reopening assessments requires a direct evidential link between portal-derived information and the income alleged to have escaped assessment; portal data alone is insufficient without documentary support for transactions or gifts, and a show cause notice must provide adequate particulars and reflect proper consideration of the taxpayer's response before reassessment proceeds.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Non retrospective application of punitive benami provisions affirmed, limiting enforcement to post amendment transactions.
    Application of Section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 concerns whether punitive provisions enacted in 2016 apply to transactions predating the amendment. The Appellate Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent that such punitive provisions must be applied prospectively, and the High Court emphasized adherence to that interpretation while allowing parties to pursue further remedies pending the Supreme Court review.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of perishable imports allowed pending valuation, subject to provisional assessment and bond to protect revenue interests.
    The dispute concerns provisional release of perishable imported apples amid a valuation contest tied to a stayed minimum import price notification. The instrument requires provisional assessment of the Bill of Entry within a brief timeframe and permits conditional provisional release upon the importer furnishing a bond and meeting terms set by customs, thereby reconciling the protection of revenue interests with the practical need to avoid loss to perishable consignments pending final resolution of the notification's applicability.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Prospective application of punitive benami amendment upheld, limiting reach to post-enactment transactions and preserving pre-enactment protections.
    The Madras High Court affirmed that the enhanced punitive provision introduced by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is substantive and applies prospectively; it endorsed the Tribunal's reliance on the Supreme Court's Ganapati Dealcom decision, treated a pending Supreme Court review petition as not displacing that precedent, and disposed of the appeals while allowing further proceedings consistent with prospectivity and prior constitutional findings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Disallowance of expenses must rest on specific documentation defects, not on blanket percentage adjustments.
    Disallowance of business expenses on a summary or estimate basis requires specific, pointed deficiencies and cannot rest on generalized conclusions about excessiveness; in businesses with routine small transactions, tax authorities must examine the nature of operations and identify particular defects in documentation before applying blanket percentage disallowances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Statutory Minimum Price interpretation: excess cane payments treated as appropriation of profits, not deductible business expense.
    The core issue is whether payments for sugarcane in excess of the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) are deductible business expenditures or constitute an appropriation of profits. The Assessing Officer relied on standard accounting practice requiring provisions for liabilities at year end and treated post closing excess payments as distributions of operational surplus. The appellate view upheld that cooperative status does not alter the tax analysis and that payments beyond the SMP do not qualify as allowable business expenses absent proper provisioning within the accounting period.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Direct incriminating evidence requirement: third party search materials alone cannot sustain unexplained investment additions.
    Additions alleged as unexplained investments and undisclosed interest income based on third party search materials require a demonstrable direct nexus between those seized records and the assessee; absent such direct incriminating evidence, reliance on third party statements or documents is insufficient. Procedural safeguards and transactional indicia-such as cross examination opportunities, banking records, documentary support, and TDS-reduce the probative value of seized material when direct linkage is lacking.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under Section 114A: no justification where importer accepted correct classification and paid differential duty before notice.
    Issue: imposition of a penalty for alleged suppression when the importer accepted correct tariff classification and paid the differential duty with interest before issuance of a show cause notice. The importer attributed the earlier misclassification to an agent error and denied intent to evade duty. The authority observed the accurate product description, admission of correct classification and prompt payment, concluded absence of suppression of facts and determined that the statutory penalty provision was not justified on these facts.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Liability under Section 72: duty rests with duty-free shop licence-holder when trade facility conditions are breached.
    Duty arises where a duty-free shop licence-holder breaches voucher and recordkeeping conditions under the trade facility; the licence-holder bears responsibility for payment of duty and interest when procedural requirements are violated, while penalty depends on culpability and may be disallowed where no intent to evade duty is established and customs were aware of the transactions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation in customs demands inapplicable where no suppression, limiting reassessment for CVD on undeclared MRP entries.
    Reassessment and CVD demand arose from a post-clearance change in classification and retrospective reliance on MRP for past entries; the tribunal held that items described were essential refrigeration parts rather than accessories, that MRP-based reassessment requires clear factual basis, and that the Extended Period of Limitation is inapplicable where no suppression is established, although penalty issues may still be considered where omissions occur.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Auditor responsibility reinforced: regulatory findings against audit failures stress strict adherence to auditing standards and sanctions.
    NFRA found a statutory auditor guilty of professional misconduct for failures to comply with Standards on Auditing, including inadequate procedures to verify revenue, lack of physical inventory verification, insufficient going concern assessment, deficient materiality application, and inadequate communication with Those Charged with Governance, and applied regulatory sanctions to reinforce auditor responsibilities in preserving financial reporting integrity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Operational debt classification confirmed for supplier's claim based on the transaction's nature under the insolvency framework.
    Whether a claim from a supply arrangement is a Financial Debt or an Operational Debt depends on the transaction's substantive character. The tribunal examined contractual terms-penalties for non-delivery, interest, and security cheques-and applied precedents on the financial-versus-operational distinction. It characterised the supplier's claim, filed under Section 9, as arising from the supply of goods and therefore as an operational debt, sustaining the Resolution Professional's and Adjudicating Authority's classification.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial wisdom of committee of creditors governs resolution plan approval, limiting valuation and standing challenges by promoters.
    Exclusion of the creditor was non irregular as no claim was filed; undervaluation allegations were rejected since opportunities to raise them during the CIRP were not used; the resolution plan satisfied Committee approval requirements and reflected the Committee's commercial wisdom; and a suspended director/promoter lacked standing to challenge the approved plan, underscoring limited judicial interference post approval.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit denial over supplier deregistration; remanded for document verification and fresh adjudication to determine genuineness.
    Denial of Input Tax Credit was challenged where the supplier's registration was retrospectively cancelled; the petitioner paid through bank and the supplier appeared on records at the time. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the appellate authority to reconsider the petitioner's documentary evidence, hold a hearing, and pass a reasoned order verifying genuineness and timing of transactions; if purchases are genuine and occurred prior to cancellation, ITC is to be considered per precedent.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit as legislative concession: entitlement subject to statutory conditions, but retrospective deprivation of vested accruals is vulnerable.
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a legislative concession, not a vested right, so the legislature may lawfully prescribe eligibility conditions and procedural limits which taxpayers must strictly satisfy; however, retrospective amendments that destroy or diminish an already accrued entitlement are susceptible to challenge and have been treated as impermissible when they impair rights that vested before the amendment.

    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