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
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
    Doctrine of Reasonable Cause in Tax Penalties : Clause 470 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Voluntary Disclosure and Penalty Waiver under Indian Tax Law : Clause 469 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance with TDCAN/TAN Requirements : Clause 468 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 V...
    Penalty Provision for PAN/Aadhaar Non-Compliance in Indian Tax Law : Clause 467 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for deterrence against non-cooperation with tax authorities : Clause 466 of Incom...
    Procedural Defaults and Penalties in Indian Tax Law : Clause 465 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Ensuring Compliance Among Tax-Exempt Entities : Clause 464 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Professionals(i.e. Accountant, Marchant Banker, Registered Valuer) Accountability under Indian Incom...
    Enforcement of Information Disclosure in Cross-Border Transactions : Clause 462 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-Filing and Incorrect Filing of TDS/TCS Statements : Clause 461 of the Inc...
    Enforcement of Reporting Obligations by a non-resident having liaison office : Clause 460 of Income ...
    Penalties for Reporting Non-Compliance by Resident constituent entity of an international group unde...
    Legal Implications of Non-Compliance with Reporting Requirements : Clause 458 of the Income Tax Bill...
    Strengthening Transfer Pricing Enforcement : Clause 457 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 271...
    Compliance and Penalty Mechanisms for Investment Funds under Indian Tax Law : Clause 456 of the Inco...
    Penalties for Inaccurate Financial Reporting under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 455 of the Income ...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance in Financial Transaction Reporting : Clause 454 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-compliant Loan Repayments in India's Income Tax Law : Clause 453 of the I...
    Mandatory Electronic Payments and Penalty Regimes : Clause 452 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sect...
    Evolving Penalty Regimes for Monetary Transaction Violations : Clause 451 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
❯❯
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
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable cause defense protects taxpayers from penalties for bona fide, non culpable defaults and encourages documented compliance.
    Clause 470 creates an exception to specified penalty provisions: no penalty shall be imposed if the assessee proves there was reasonable cause for the failure. It functions as a non obstante provision covering enumerated sections, shifts the burden of proof to the taxpayer, and is aimed primarily at bona fide procedural or technical lapses rather than deliberate violations.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Voluntary disclosure and penalty waiver enable administrative relief when pre detection disclosure, cooperation and payment conditions are met.
    Clause 469 empowers the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to reduce or waive penalties under section 439 where a taxpayer has made a full and true voluntary disclosure before detection, cooperated in assessment and paid or arranged payment of tax or interest; it includes a deeming rule for full disclosure, prior approval safeguards for high value cases, a bar on multiple reliefs, a genuine hardship route with recorded reasons, a twelve month disposal limit, opportunity to be heard, and finality of orders.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to quote TDCAN/TAN: discretionary fixed sanctions apply for non compliance and knowingly false quoting.
    Clause 468 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed monetary penalty for failure to comply with Section 397 and for quoting a false Tax Deduction and Collection Account Number in prescribed documents where the person knows or believes it to be false, making the penalty discretionary and imposing a mens rea requirement for false quoting while not expressly providing for a statutory opportunity of being heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    PAN/Aadhaar compliance: new per-default penalty regime distinguishes intentional false quoting from strict liability omissions and extends responsible person liability.
    Clause 467 establishes a per-default penalty regime for non-compliance with section 262, differentiating intentional false PAN/Aadhaar quoting-which requires proof of knowledge or belief-from omissions treated as strict liability, and extends liability to persons responsible for ensuring correct quoting/authentication; it emphasizes authentication and digital e KYC integration while remaining silent on express procedural safeguards such as the opportunity to be heard, creating potential due process and transitional issues.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non cooperation: new provision allows senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty without explicit hearing safeguards.
    Clause 466 empowers specified senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty for failure to comply with section 254, mirroring prior penalty structure in authority and capped quantum but omitting express procedural safeguards such as an opportunity of being heard, defences like reasonable cause, and a requirement to record reasons, thereby raising concerns about procedural fairness and consistency in imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for procedural defaults: fixed and daily fines, capped to tax collectible, with delegated authority to impose them.
    Clause 465 creates a penalty regime for procedural non compliance under the Income Tax Bill, 2025: a fixed penalty for discrete defaults, a daily penalty for continuing defaults, a cap tying certain penalties to the amount of tax deductible or collectible, and specified authorities empowered to impose penalties; it broadens the definition of income tax authority and updates cross references to the restructured Bill, while notably omitting an explicit provision requiring an opportunity to be heard before penalty imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty regime for failure to furnish prescribed statements strengthens compliance under tax exempt reporting obligations.
    A statutory penalty regime targets failure by specified research institutions and charitable funds to furnish prescribed documents, statements, or certificates within prescribed timeframes; penalties fall within a prescribed band and are imposed at the discretion of the Assessing Officer, operating as a civil compliance measure alongside general procedural safeguards and requiring stakeholders to update compliance processes to align with re referenced substantive sections.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Professional accountability: penalty for furnishing incorrect information in professional reports or certificates under the new income tax bill.
    Clause 463 imposes a strict-liability penalty regime on accountants, merchant bankers and registered valuers for furnishing incorrect information in any report or certificate under the Act or rules. It prescribes a fixed per-instance monetary penalty and empowers the Assessing Officer, Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner (Appeals) to impose the penalty upon satisfaction that incorrect information was furnished. The clause updates definitional references for valuers, omits an explicit definition of "accountant," and operates without prejudice to other civil or criminal consequences.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish information: fixed sanction for inaccurate or missing cross-border disclosure, raising proportionality concerns.
    Clause 462 penalises any person required to furnish information under section 397(3)(d) who fails to supply such information or furnishes inaccurate information; the Assessing Officer may impose a fixed monetary penalty, the provision mirrors Section 271I in structure and intent, lacks an express reasonable-cause defence or gradation of penalty, and raises interpretative issues as to the scope of "inaccurate information," procedural safeguards, and proportionality in enforcement.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: discretionary fines with short grace period where tax is paid and statement filed promptly.
    Clause 461 creates a penalty for failure to deliver statements under section 397(3)(b) or for furnishing incorrect information, authorising the Assessing Officer to impose a discretionary monetary penalty equivalent in range to the existing Section 271H. Clause 461(2) exempts penalty where tax, fee and interest are paid to the Central Government and the statement is filed within a short grace period, thereby balancing deterrence with relief for prompt substantive compliance while leaving procedural safeguards and definitions, such as "incorrect information," unclearly specified.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to submit statements may be imposed by the assessing officer as a daily or capped sanction, discretion preserved.
    Clause 460 permits the Assessing Officer to impose discretionary monetary penalties on any person required to furnish a statement under section 505 for failure to file within the prescribed period, using a two-tier structure of a daily sanction for short-term delay and a capped penalty for longer default, with applicability dependent on the scope of the parent reporting obligation and subject to the general procedural and appellate framework of the tax law.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reporting penalties: new clause preserves escalating daily fines and a large fixed penalty for inaccurate international tax reports.
    Clause 459 establishes a tiered penalty regime under section 511 for reporting entities: daily penalties for failure to furnish reports, daily penalties for failure to produce information after the allowed period, an escalated daily penalty if default continues after service of a penalty order, and a substantial fixed penalty for furnishing inaccurate information or failing to correct known or discovered inaccuracies. The prescribed authority under section 511 is empowered to impose these penalties, and the clause mirrors Section 271GB in quantum and triggers while raising issues about reasonable cause relief and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to report transfers of management or control triggers significant compliance and enforcement consequences.
    Clause 458 creates a penalty for failure by an Indian concern to furnish information or documents under section 506, authorising the prescribed income-tax authority to impose either a transaction-value-based penalty where a transaction effects a direct or indirect transfer of management or control, or a fixed monetary penalty otherwise, and otherwise mirrors the substantive framework and enforcement objectives of Section 271GA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing documentation penalty: failure to furnish documents leads to transaction value based penalties and enforcement by tax authorities.
    Failure to furnish prescribed transfer pricing information or documentation for international or specified domestic transactions triggers a transaction value based penalty under Clause 457, enforceable by the Assessing Officer, authorised Transfer Pricing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals); the clause ties this enforcement directly to the obligations in section 171(2) and raises interpretive issues concerning the meaning of failure, computation of transaction value, overlap with other penalties, and the availability of a reasonable cause defence.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: eligible investment funds face a fixed sanction under the bill; authority may impose it.
    Clause 456 imposes a fixed penalty where an eligible investment fund fails to furnish required statements or information within the prescribed time; the prescribed income-tax authority may direct payment of the fixed sanction. The reporting deadline is set by the substantive eligibility reporting provision; the penalty is discretionary rather than automatic, lacks a graded scale, and does not expressly specify procedural safeguards such as criteria for discretion or an opportunity to be heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for inaccurate financial reporting imposes institutional and account-holder liability while enabling recovery of penalties from account holders.
    Clause 455 mandates penalties for persons required to furnish statements of financial transactions or reportable accounts for providing inaccurate information or failing to meet due diligence obligations, and imposes an additional per-account penalty on reporting financial institutions where inaccuracies stem from account-holder-supplied false information; reporting institutions may recover such additional penalties from the responsible account holders by direct recovery or retention of funds, with imposition directed by the prescribed income-tax authority and substantive continuity with the former Section 271FAA.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish financial transaction statements - escalating daily sanctions for continued non-compliance after notice.
    Clause 454 creates a statutory penalty regime for failure to furnish a statement of financial transaction or reportable account, prescribing a daily penalty accruing from the date the filing deadline lapses, with an escalated daily rate where default continues after a formal notice, and vesting discretionary imposition authority in the income-tax authority subject to procedural safeguards and rights to challenge.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non-compliant loan repayments: Assessing Officer may impose a penalty equal to the amount repaid for procedural breaches.
    Clause 453 permits the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to any loan, deposit or specified advance repaid in contravention of section 188, applying to all persons and covering repayments made by non-transparent modes. The provision creates strict liability based on procedural breach rather than mens rea, centralizes enforcement with the Assessing Officer, and omits an explicit reasonable-cause defence, raising potential interpretative and transitional issues regarding the scope of specified advances and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Electronic payment mandate triggers daily penalties for non compliance unless a taxpayer proves good and sufficient reason.
    Clause 452 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed per day monetary penalty for failure to provide prescribed electronic modes of payment under section 187, subject to a saving where the person proves good and sufficient reason for the failure; the provision mirrors the former section 271DB framework but streamlines authority and lacks detailed procedural guidance.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Monetary transaction penalty: discretion to impose a penalty equal to prohibited receipt unless good and sufficient reasons are proved.
    Clause 451 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to the sum received in contravention of section 186 unless the recipient proves good and sufficient reasons; the provision emphasises proportionality, vests discretion in enforcement, omits explicit procedural safeguards and mens rea, and mirrors the substantive penalty quantum and defence in the earlier statutory regime while differing in statutory tone and procedural concision.

    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 511 "Furnishing of report in respect of international group." 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

      Section 511 Furnishing of report in respect of international group

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      The document reproduces Clause 511 - Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version, setting out reporting obligations for constituent entities of international groups (country-by-country reporting style). It matters for multinational groups with Indian resident constituent entities - both taxpayers (resident constituent entities, parent entities, alternate reporting entities) and the tax administration. Effective date or commencement is Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: Clause 511 sits within miscellaneous provisions of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 and proposes a standalone reporting obligation for "international groups". The clause creates duties to notify the prescribed income-tax authority and to furnish reports containing consolidated and constituent-level financial and operational information. Definitions and scope are provided within the clause itself. Any subordinate rules, forms, timelines and thresholds are to be set out "as prescribed" (delegated rule-making).

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 511 imposes three principal obligations:

      • Notification (sub-section (1)): Every constituent entity resident in India that is part of an international group whose parent is not resident in India must notify the prescribed income-tax authority in the prescribed form and manner by the prescribed date whether it is the alternate reporting entity and/or provide details of the parent or alternate reporting entity and their jurisdictions.
      • Reporting (sub-section (2)): Every parent entity or alternate reporting entity resident in India must, for each reporting accounting year, furnish a report to the prescribed income-tax authority within twelve months from the end of that reporting accounting year, in the prescribed form and manner.
      • Fallback reporting (sub-section (4)): Where an Indian resident constituent entity is not the parent/alternate reporting entity, it must furnish the report within a prescribed period if the parent is resident in a jurisdiction that (a) is not obligated to file such a report; (b) lacks an agreement with India for exchange of the report; or (c) has experienced a "systemic failure" and that failure has been intimated by the prescribed income-tax authority.
      • Sub-sections (3) and (6) detail report content and exceptions; (7) grants the authority the power to issue notices and require supporting information; (8) provides a consolidated-revenue threshold exemption; and (9) permits application "as prescribed".

      Interpretation

      The text indicates a legislative intent to implement a country-by-country reporting regime targeted at large international groups with constituent entities resident in India. The use of express definitions (e.g., "consolidated financial statement", "parent entity", "constituent entity", "reporting accounting year") demonstrates an intent to align reporting obligations with financial reporting and with international standards for transfer pricing transparency. Several interpretive principles are signalled by the text: alignment with parent-jurisdiction financial periods, deference to prescribed forms and procedures, and reliance on intergovernmental agreements for automatic exchange.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Key carve-outs and conditions:

      • Threshold exemption (sub-section (8)): The section will not apply if the total consolidated group revenue for the preceding accounting year does not exceed the prescribed amount - the specific monetary threshold is Not stated in the document.
      • Non-application where an alternate reporting entity files in its jurisdiction and certain conditions are met (sub-section (6)): Conditions include the foreign report being required by local law, presence of an exchange agreement between that country and India, absence of any systemic failure communicated by the Indian authority, written designation of the alternate reporting entity, and prior notification under sub-section (1). These are cumulative preconditions.
      • Fallback allocation where multiple Indian resident constituent entities exist (sub-section (5)): If more than one Indian constituent entity exists, any one designated entity may furnish the report provided the group has designated that entity and the information has been conveyed in writing to the prescribed authority.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A multinational group with a non-resident parent and one Indian subsidiary that is designated as the alternate reporting entity must notify the income-tax authority in India and, if resident as alternate reporting entity, file the report within 12 months of the reporting accounting year end. (All procedural details - forms/timelines - are Not stated in the document.)
      • Example 2: An Indian permanent establishment (PE) of a foreign enterprise that prepares separate financial statements as a PE falls within "constituent entity" and, if the foreign parent's jurisdiction neither files nor exchanges reports with India, that Indian PE may be required to furnish the report within the prescribed period. (Precise prescribed period is Not stated in the document.)

      Interplay

      The clause expressly contemplates interaction with:

      • Section 159(1) or (2) (via the definition of "agreement") - signalling reliance on specified intergovernmental agreements for exchange.
      • Section 173(c) (for the meaning of "permanent establishment").
      • Prescribed rules/guidelines/conditions that remain to be issued for form, manner, dates and thresholds. The document does not reproduce any subordinate rules or forms. Specific interactions with existing transfer-pricing or information-exchange regimes are Not stated in the document beyond the express reference to agreements for exchange.

      Differences between the Document 1 "Section 511 of Income-tax Act, 2025" and Document 2 "Clause 511 - Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version"

      • Prescription wording: Document 1 repeatedly uses the phrase "as may be prescribed" (e.g., sub-sects (1), (2), (3), (9)), whereas Document 2 often uses the shorter "as prescribed".
        • Practical impact: negligible substantive difference in content; "as may be prescribed" can imply delegation to subordinate legislation, while "as prescribed" is more neutral - both indicate delegated rule-making. In practice, stakeholders should expect rules/guidelines to be issued regardless.
      • Minor phrasing differences: e.g., Document 1 in sub-section (4)(c) reads "where there has been a systemic failure of the country or territory and such failure has been intimated by the prescribed income-tax authority to such constituent entity" while Document 2 reads "where there has been a systemic failure and such failure has been intimated by the prescribed income-tax authority to such constituent entity."
        • Practical impact: none substantive; the enacted text in Document 1 clarifies that the systemic failure is of the foreign country/territory, but Document 2's meaning would be read the same way in context.
      • Overall: there are no material substantive differences in obligations, definitions, thresholds or exceptions between the two texts provided. The principal practical impact arises from the change in status from a Bill clause (Document 2) to an enacted statutory section (Document 1) and minor drafting refinements that preserve the same legal obligations and delegated-rulemaking expectation.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Indian resident constituent entities of international groups must track whether their group's parent is resident outside India, determine whether they are designated as alternate reporting entity, and ensure timely notification to the prescribed income-tax authority. Parent or alternate reporting entities resident in India must prepare and file the prescribed report within 12 months of the reporting accounting year end. Failure to notify or file may expose entities to compliance actions under the Act and to information requests under sub-section (7).
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The text requires aggregated country-level financial and operational metrics and constituent-level details; accordingly, entities will need robust consolidated financial statements, country allocation methodologies, documentation of designation as alternate reporting entity, and written communications to the Indian authority. The precise content and format are "as prescribed" and therefore entities must monitor subordinate instruments for technical compliance requirements (not specified in the Bill text).

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 511 establishes country-by-country style reporting obligations for international groups with Indian resident constituent entities.
      • There is a dual duty: initial notification by Indian resident constituent entities (where parent is non-resident) and annual reporting by Indian parent/alternate reporting entities within 12 months of reporting accounting year end.
      • Fallback reporting obligations apply to Indian resident constituent entities if the parent's jurisdiction does not file, does not exchange, or has a communicated systemic failure.
      • Exemptions hinge on a consolidated revenue threshold for the preceding year; the specific threshold is to be prescribed and is Not stated in the document.
      • The power to request supporting information and documents within defined timelines is provided to the prescribed income-tax authority.
      • Many operational details (form, manner, prescribed dates, exact thresholds) are left to delegated rules; stakeholders must monitor rule-making for compliance specifics.

      Full Text:

      Section 511 Furnishing of report in respect of international group

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax