Just a moment...

⚠ ✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Keyword Search :
AI Tools : New
Ask tax questions in natural language. Powered by AI trained on the TaxTMI legal database. Use AI Tools ➞
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 characters 0/2000
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
  6. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  7. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
    8. 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.
Relevance Default Date
    Manuals Income Tax
    Whether an amount received by an Individual (a co-parcener to the HUF) from this HUF would be taxabl...
    Manuals Income Tax
    Change in accounting policy - When is to be changed - What should be the basis for change in account...
    Manuals Income Tax
    Accrual of income - Scope of ICDS - If there is conflict between Section 5 and Section 145, which wo...
    Manuals Income Tax
    ICDS - Accrual basis of Accounting - Accrual of income versus Receipt of income
    Manuals Income Tax
    Bad debts out of income recognised on the basis of ICDS but not yet recognised in books of account
    Manuals Income Tax
    Applicability of ICDS for the purpose of disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) and 40(a)(ia)
    Manuals Income Tax
    Applicability of ICDS on TDS
    Manuals Income Tax
    Maintenance of Books of accounts for the purpose of ICDS
    Notifications GST
    Levy of GST - Reverse Charge on Legal Services - Services provided by an individual advocate includi...
    Case Laws VAT / Sales Tax
    Reversal of Input Tax Credit - In GST / VAT era, emergence of by-product which is exempt during manu...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Capital Gain - transfer of right in the land or transfer of land itself - addition u/s 50C - Harassm...
    Manuals Income Tax
    Whether it is required to disclose a change in the accounting policies if it has no material effect ...
    Manuals Income Tax
    ICDS-I provides that an accounting policy shall not be changed without ’reasonable cause’. The t...
    Manuals Income Tax
    Why does the marked to market loss or an expected loss shall not be recognised as per ICDS-I.
    Manuals Income Tax
    When does an assessee is required to make disclosures of fundamental accounting assumptions as per I...
    Manuals Income Tax
    What is the scope of Going Concern as per ICDS I.
    Manuals Income Tax
    ICDS-I requires disclosure of significant accounting policies and other ICDS requires specific discl...
    Manuals Income Tax
    In case any of the ICDS provisions is contrary to a circular or press release issued by the CBDT, wh...
    Manuals Income Tax
    Whether the provisions of ICDS apply to a non-resident who claims the benefit of a double taxation a...
    Manuals Income Tax
    When can a provision be recognized as per ICDS X.
❮
❯
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

+

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

NOTE:

Open Link
Notes
Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
Results Found:
Show All Summaries Hide All Summaries
Manuals Income Tax
Whether an amount received by an Individual (a co-parcener to the HUF) from this HUF would be taxabl...
Show AI Summary
Exemption for HUF distributions may not apply where clubbing rules apply, affecting taxability of co parcener receipts.
Amounts received by an individual co parcener from the HUF are exempt in the hands of the assessee under the general exemption for such receipts, subject to the overriding provision dealing with clubbing or attribution of income which can limit that exemption.
Manuals Income Tax
Change in accounting policy - When is to be changed - What should be the basis for change in account...
Show AI Summary
Accounting policy change requires reasonable cause and substance-over-form treatment to reflect a true and fair view.
Accounting policies must present a true and fair view of the state of affairs and income; treatment and presentation must follow substance over legal form; an accounting policy shall not be changed without reasonable cause, and any change must serve faithful representation for income computation and disclosure.
Manuals Income Tax
Accrual of income - Scope of ICDS - If there is conflict between Section 5 and Section 145, which wo...
Show AI Summary
Accrual versus accounting method: accrual-based charge under residency provisions overrides cash-basis bookkeeping for taxing income.
Where income has become taxable under the substantive provision governing non-resident receipts, that charging provision prevails over a taxpayer's cash-basis accounting; Section 145 is a machinery provision to effectuate the charge and cannot be used to defeat or nullify the substantive charge so as to allow taxable income to escape tax.
Manuals Income Tax
ICDS - Accrual basis of Accounting - Accrual of income versus Receipt of income
Show AI Summary
Accrual of income: recognition occurs when a vested right and debtor liability arise, not necessarily on actual receipt.
ICDS I explains that accrual of income arises when a vested right to receive payment emerges and a corresponding liability is created on the other party; postponement or non-receipt does not prevent accrual, though non-receipt may justify separate deductions or claims. Accrual and arisal denote an inchoate right prior to actual receipt, while receipt denotes physical collection, and for tax accounting the existence of the right and the debtor's liability are the operative tests for accrual-based recognition.
Manuals Income Tax
Bad debts out of income recognised on the basis of ICDS but not yet recognised in books of account
Show AI Summary
Deduction for bad debts allowed where income recognised under ICDS but not recorded in accounts is later irrecoverable.
Where a debt included in income on the basis of Income Computation and Disclosure Standards but not recorded in the accounts becomes irrecoverable, Finance Act, 2016 permits the debt (or part) to be allowed as a deduction in the year it becomes irrecoverable and deems that the debt has been written off in the accounts for the purposes of the deduction.
Manuals Income Tax
Applicability of ICDS for the purpose of disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) and 40(a)(ia)
Show AI Summary
Applicability of ICDS: timing of TDS entries determines whether expenditure is disallowable under TDS disallowance provisions.
ICDS apply only to computation of income under Profit & gains from business or profession and Income from Other Sources. For Sections 40(a)(i) and 40(a)(ia), disallowance depends on whether tax was deductible and whether an entry creating that liability or deduction existed in the year expenditure was claimed; absence of such an entry negates disallowance, while prior-year deduction of tax prevents disallowance in the year of allowance.
Manuals Income Tax
Applicability of ICDS on TDS
Show AI Summary
ICDS exclusion from TDS timing: TDS deduction timing and taxable expenditure follow book credit or payment date.
ICDS does not affect TDS mechanics: the time for TDS (date of credit in books or date of payment) and the expenditure amount subject to deduction are determined by the books of account or payment date, not by ICDS computation of allowable expenditure.
Manuals Income Tax
Maintenance of Books of accounts for the purpose of ICDS
Show AI Summary
ICDS compliance: prepare ICDS-based financials and reconciliations to ensure taxable income computation aligns with disclosure standards.
Differences between accounting under ICDS and other accounting frameworks can materially affect taxable income and subsequent years' computations; taxpayers should quantify divergences and account for consequential tax adjustments. Practically, maintain parallel ICDS-based profit and loss and balance sheet statements and prepare a detailed reconciliation with primary accounting records to ensure all ICDS adjustments are considered. Auditors must certify that computation of total income complies with ICDS, making transparent documentation of adjustments and reconciliations necessary for audit certification and tax compliance.
Notifications GST
Levy of GST - Reverse Charge on Legal Services - Services provided by an individual advocate includi...
Show AI Summary
Reverse charge on legal services broadened to include advisory and representational work under GST notifications.
Corrigenda amend reverse-charge entries to treat "services provided by an individual advocate including a senior advocate or firm of advocates by way of legal services, directly or indirectly," as taxable, and add an Explanation that "legal service" includes advice, consultancy, assistance in any branch of law and representational services, thereby broadening the scope beyond representational services before courts, tribunals or authorities.
Case Laws VAT / Sales Tax
Reversal of Input Tax Credit - In GST / VAT era, emergence of by-product which is exempt during manu...
Show AI Summary
Reversal of input tax credit: sale of exempt by products triggers reversal under VAT/GST credit rules.
Reversal of input tax credit is triggered by the sale of goods produced incidentally during manufacture, not by their status as by products. The statutory credit regime aims to prevent double taxation by granting input credit for inputs used in manufacture, but the legislature determines the extent and conditions of credit. A provision that uses the terms 'goods' and 'sale' does not distinguish by products from final products, so where the incidental output is marketable and sold for consideration, reversal rules apply.
Case Laws Income Tax
Capital Gain - transfer of right in the land or transfer of land itself - addition u/s 50C - Harassm...
Show AI Summary
Capital gain valuation under section 50C on transfer of contractual rights challenged as inappropriate and commercially onerous.
Application of section 50C to a transfer of rights under a power of attorney, where no possession or control of the immovable property passed and no stamp authority value was adopted, was contested; the assessing officer's adoption of an enhanced valuation for computing short term capital gains was regarded as inappropriate and characterised as harassment, and that addition was reversed on appeal.
Manuals Income Tax
Whether it is required to disclose a change in the accounting policies if it has no material effect ...
Show AI Summary
Accounting policy change disclosure required when future material effect is expected; disclose at adoption and when it first becomes material.
Change in accounting policies that has no material effect in the current previous year but is reasonably expected to have material effect later must be disclosed: (a) in the previous year in which the change is adopted; and (b) in the previous year in which the change has material effect for the first time.
Manuals Income Tax
ICDS-I provides that an accounting policy shall not be changed without ’reasonable cause’. The t...
Show AI Summary
Change in accounting policy: permitted only for reasonable cause and where AS 5 requires it or improves financial presentation.
A change in accounting policy will be treated as reasonable if it meets the criterion established by AS 5: the change is permissible only where it is required by statute, necessary for compliance with an accounting standard, or results in a more appropriate presentation of the enterprise's financial statements.
Manuals Income Tax
Why does the marked to market loss or an expected loss shall not be recognised as per ICDS-I.
Show AI Summary
Mark-to-market loss recognition barred under ICDS, allowed only if another ICDS or tax law permits.
Mark-to-market and expected losses are not recognised under ICDS I unless another ICDS permits such recognition; the Accounting Standards Committee held that because anticipated profits are not recognised, parity requires that expected or mark-to-market losses also be excluded, while established tax-law precedent allows deduction for exchange fluctuation losses arising on revenue-purpose borrowings.
Manuals Income Tax
When does an assessee is required to make disclosures of fundamental accounting assumptions as per I...
Show AI Summary
Disclosure of fundamental accounting assumptions required when Going Concern, Consistency or Accrual are not followed in tax reporting.
ICDS I requires that where the Going Concern, Consistency and Accrual assumptions are followed no specific disclosure is required, but any departure from these fundamental accounting assumptions must be disclosed; the revised tax audit reporting format provides columns to record such disclosures.
Manuals Income Tax
What is the scope of Going Concern as per ICDS I.
Show AI Summary
Going concern assumption affects income computation and disclosure, requiring a different measurement basis if materially impinged.
Going concern is the assumption that an assessee will continue operations and has no intent or necessity to liquidate or materially curtail business; it underpins periodic income computation and financial statements and applies in the absence of contrary information. Material uncertainties that cast doubt on going concern may impinge this assumption. ICDS I does not specify computation methods when going concern is not met; absent such mandate an assessee may follow the Framework for the Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements and prepare statements on a different basis, affecting recognition, measurement and disclosure.
Manuals Income Tax
ICDS-I requires disclosure of significant accounting policies and other ICDS requires specific discl...
Show AI Summary
ICDS disclosure requirements must be reported in tax audit reports and reflected in amended income tax return schedules.
ICDS require disclosure of accounting policies and ICDS adjustments; the net effect must be disclosed in the Return of Income. Disclosures required under ICDS shall be made in the tax audit report in Form 3CD for taxpayers subject to tax audit, and no separate disclosure regime exists for those not liable to tax audit; return forms were amended to include a schedule ICDS.
Manuals Income Tax
In case any of the ICDS provisions is contrary to a circular or press release issued by the CBDT, wh...
Show AI Summary
ICDS supremacy - where ICDS conflicts with CBDT circulars or press releases, the ICDS treatment prevails.
Where ICDS provisions conflict with earlier CBDT circulars or press releases, the later ICDS provisions prevail for the period after they take effect; CBDT circulars and press releases are interpretative guidance binding on tax officers but not on taxpayers.
Manuals Income Tax
Whether the provisions of ICDS apply to a non-resident who claims the benefit of a double taxation a...
Show AI Summary
DTAA supremacy: ICDS governs income computation when the treaty is silent, non-conflicting, or specifies only tax rate.
ICDS apply to non-residents claiming DTAA benefits only where the DTAA is silent, where there is no conflict between ICDS computation and treaty treatment, where the income falls outside the DTAA's scope, or where the DTAA fixes a tax rate but does not prescribe the method of computing the income, in which case ICDS governs computation.
Manuals Income Tax
When can a provision be recognized as per ICDS X.
Show AI Summary
Recognition of provisions under ICDS X requires a present obligation, probable outflow of resources, and a reliable estimate.
Recognition of a provision under ICDS X requires a present obligation from a past event, a reasonably certain outflow of resources to settle the obligation, and a reliable estimate of the obligation amount; routine future operating costs must not be recognised as provisions.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Home › TMI Notes › Income Tax › Act-Rules › Category › This
Back

All TMI Notes

whatsapp Join Channel
Showing Results for : Reset Filters
Income Tax

Comparison of section 487 "Abetment of false return, etc." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

17 September, 2025

Contents
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Summary
Note

Note

-

Bookmark

Print

Print

Print Options

Section 487 Offences by companies.

Income-tax Act, 2025

At a Glance

The documents are two textual variants of Clause/Section 487 dealing with "Offences by companies" under the Income-tax legislation of 2025: (1) Clause 487 - Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version); and (2) Section 487 - Income-tax Act, 2025 (enacted text). Both set out vicarious and personal liability for corporate tax offences. The enacted text contains modest but important drafting differences from the Bill: notably, an expanded non-reliance clause in sub-section (3) and slightly different framing in sub-section (2). Affected parties include companies and persons in managerial or controlling positions (directors, managers, secretaries, other officers, partners, controlling members). Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

Background & Scope

Statutory hooks: the title indicates this provision falls under "Offences and Prosecution" of the Income-tax statute of 2025. Both texts define the circumstances in which a company and specified persons are deemed guilty of an offence under the Act and prescribe liability when offences are committed by companies. Definitions provided in sub-section (5) (Bill) / (5) (Act) define "company" (a body corporate and includes a firm; an association of persons or a body of individuals, whether incorporated or not) and "director" (in relation to a firm, a partner; in relation to any association/body, any member controlling the affairs). No other definitions or legislative history are provided in the documents.

Statutory Provision Mode

Text & Scope

Both texts operate on two complementary principles: (a) vicarious or deemed guilt of persons in charge of a company's business at the time an offence was committed (sub-section (1)); and (b) personal culpability where an offence is proved to have been committed with the consent, connivance, or attributable to neglect of specified office-holders (sub-section (3)). Sub-section (4) addresses the sentencing frame where the offence by the company is punishable with imprisonment and fine - prescribing fine for the company and liability to be proceeded against and punished for the concerned persons "as per the provisions of this Act." Sub-section (5) supplies internal definitions for "company" and "director" (as described above).

Interpretation

The texts adopt a classical statutory approach to corporate criminality and derivative liability: imposing deemed guilt on the company and those "in charge of, and responsible to" it for business conduct (sub-section (1)); allowing exculpation if the person proves lack of knowledge or that all due diligence was exercised (sub-section (2)); and imposing direct liability on directors/officers where consent/connivance/neglect is established (sub-section (3)). The enacted text's phrasing in sub-section (3) - prefacing the paragraph with "Irrespective of anything contained in sub-section (1) and (2)" - signals a legislative intention to make sub-section (3) operate notwithstanding the defences or deeming in (1) and (2). The Bill's version limits the non-reliance to sub-section (1) only. That drafting distinction affects how sub-section (2)'s due diligence defence interacts with personal liability under sub-section (3).

Exceptions/Provisos

Sub-section (2) provides a statutory defence for persons deemed guilty under sub-section (1): the person must prove either (a) the offence was committed without his knowledge, or (b) he had exercised all due diligence to prevent commission of such offence. The texts otherwise contain no further provisos, thresholds, or procedural conditions. No ancillary definitions of "due diligence," burden of proof specifics, or evidentiary standards are provided. Not stated in the document: standard of proof (criminal or civil), whether the due diligence defence shifts burden of proof, or procedural mechanisms for prosecution.

Illustrations

  • Illustration 1: Not stated in the document - the text does not supply an example of application where a company commits an offence and an officer invokes the due diligence defence.
  • Illustration 2: Not stated in the document - no example demonstrating the operation of sub-section (3) when consent/connivance/neglect is proved.

Interplay

Both texts cross-reference only internal subsections. No external Rules, Notifications, or Circulars are cited in the provided texts. Not stated in the document: interaction with general principles of criminal liability, procedural provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, or any tax procedure rules. The enacted text's broader "irrespective of anything contained in sub-section (1) and (2)" clause suggests a stronger statutory priority for sub-section (3) over the defences in (2), potentially limiting the circumstances in which an officer can invoke the due diligence defence where consent/connivance/neglect are alleged.

Differences Between the Provisions and Practical Impact

  • Scope of non-reliance in sub-section (3): The Bill (old version) states sub-section (3) applies "irrespective of the provisions of sub-section (1)" (i.e., it carves out directors/etc. from the deeming rule in (1)). The enacted Act expands that to "Irrespective of anything contained in sub-section (1) and (2)".
    • Practical impact: Under the Act text, sub-section (3) operates notwithstanding both the deeming in (1) and the due diligence defence in (2). This means that where consent/connivance/neglect is proved, the officer cannot rely on the due diligence defence in (2) to avoid being "deemed to be guilty", thereby narrowing the scope of the due diligence escape for officers in those circumstances.
  • Wording of sub-section (2): The Bill uses "the person referred in the said sub-section proves" while the Act uses "the person referred therein proves". This is a drafting stylistic change with no substantive effect.
    • Practical impact: None substantive; purely editorial.
  • Introductory phrasing to sub-section (3): The Act uses "Irrespective of anything contained in sub-section (1) and (2), where an offence ... such director, manager, secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty" - while the Bill phrases it conditionally ("If it is proved ... then irrespective of the provisions of sub-section (1), such director... shall also be deemed to be guilty"). The Act places the "irrespective" prefix before the conditional clause, making explicit that the operation of sub-section (3) displaces both sub-section (1) and (2).
    • Practical impact: The ordering in the Act strengthens the independence of sub-section (3) as a separate route to personal liability, limiting defendants' ability to rely on (2) once the facts in (3) are established.
  • Sub-section (4) phrasing: Both texts require that where the offence by the company is punishable with imprisonment and fine, the company is fined and the relevant persons shall be "liable to be proceeded against and punished as per the provisions of this Act." Wording differences are minor and do not change the substance.
    • Practical impact: None significant.
  • Terminology in sub-section (5): The Bill states "In this section" while the Act states "For the purposes of this section". Substantively the same.
    • Practical impact: None substantive.

Practical Implications

  • Compliance and risk: Under the enacted text, officers and persons in charge face increased exposure where an offence is proved to have been committed with their consent, connivance or attributable to neglect - they will be deemed guilty irrespective of a previously available due diligence defence. Companies and those in charge should be aware that proving "due diligence" may not be an operative shield where allegations of consent/connivance/neglect are made. The Bill's earlier formulation potentially left more room for invoking sub-section (2) against allegations in (3); that protection is narrowed in the Act.
  • Record-keeping/evidence: Not stated in the document are specific documentary or procedural requirements. However, the text implies that persons in charge who wish to rely on the due diligence defence under sub-section (2) should maintain contemporaneous records demonstrating the exercise of all due diligence and steps taken to prevent offences. Not stated in the document: precise contents or format of such records, retention periods, or evidentiary thresholds.
  • Prosecutorial approach: Not stated in the document whether prosecuting authorities must separately prove both the company's offence and the individual's consent/connivance/neglect, nor how evidentiary burdens are allocated. The enacted drafting suggests prosecutors can pursue personal liability under sub-section (3) even if the person attempts to rely on sub-section (2).
  • Sentencing consequences: Where the company's offence attracts imprisonment and fine, the company is to be punished with fine and implicated persons are "liable to be proceeded against and punished as per the provisions of this Act." Not stated in the document are minimum/maximum fines for the company or sentencing ranges for individuals; no procedural guidance on joint or separate trials is provided.

Key Takeaways

  • Both texts create deeming liability for a company and persons "in charge of, and responsible to" it for corporate tax offences.
  • Both provide a due diligence defence for persons deemed guilty under sub-section (1), but the enacted Act limits the availability of that defence where consent/connivance/neglect is proved under sub-section (3).
  • The Act's sub-section (3) expressly operates "irrespective of anything contained in sub-section (1) and (2)", which narrows officers' defences relative to the Bill version.
  • Definitions for "company" and "director" broaden corporate constructs to include firms and associations and specify partner/controlling member roles.
  • Several procedural and evidentiary details (standard of proof, burden allocation, examples, record-keeping requirements) are Not stated in the document.
  • Practical consequence: officers should ensure robust preventive compliance systems and contemporaneous documentation to the extent available, recognising that such evidence may not avert liability where consent/connivance/neglect is proved.

Full Text:

Section 487 Offences by companies.

Topics

Acts Income Tax
Next ➔