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
    Evolution of Appellate Remedies in Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 356 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 V...
    Appellate Remedies against Advance Rulings : Clause 389 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 245...
    Evolution of Procedural Regulation in Advance Rulings under Indian Tax Law : Clause 388 of Income Ta...
    The Transformation of Advance Rulings Powers under Indian Tax Law : Clause 387 of the Income Tax Bil...
    Fraud, Misrepresentation, and the Void Ab Initio Doctrine in Advance Rulings : Clause 386 of the Inc...
    Jurisdictional Bar on Parallel Proceedings : Clause 385 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 245...
    Procedure for processing applications for advance rulings in the Indian tax regime : Clause 384 of t...
    Procedural Evolution of Advance Ruling Applications : Clause 383 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Legal Insights on Vacancies and Defects in Advance Ruling Bodies : Clause 382 of Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Administrative Efficiency vs. Judicial Oversight : Clause 381 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Secti...
    Changing Landscape of Advance Rulings in Indian Tax Law : Clause 380 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs...
    Evolving ADR Mechanisms in Indian Taxation : Clause 379 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 245...
    Set-off and Withholding of Tax Refunds : Clause 438 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 245 of ...
    Change in the Interest on Tax Refunds under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 437 of the Income Tax Bil...
    Limits on Challenging Completed Assessments in Refund Proceedings : Clause 436 of Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Automatic Refunds under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 435 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Procedural and Substantive Aspects of TDS Refunds : Clause 434 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Limitation, Procedure, and Rights of Refund Claims in Indian Tax Law : Clause 433 of the Income Tax ...
    Refund Entitlement in Special Cases (Death, Incapacity, Insolvency, Liquidation, or Other Causes) : ...
    Statutory Safeguards for Taxpayer Refunds : Clause 431 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 vs. Section 237 of I...
❯❯
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
    Appellate scope reform consolidates appealable orders, enables faceless appeals and transfers while preserving rehearing safeguards.
    Clause 356 prescribes an exhaustive list of appealable orders before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), defines "status" by cross reference, prohibits appeals where orders are passed by or with approval of authorities above Deputy Commissioner, and empowers the Board to transfer appeals between JCIT(A) and Commissioner (Appeals) with a mandated opportunity of rehearing. It formally enables a government notified faceless disposal scheme-permitting elimination of physical interface and modification of procedural provisions-and authorizes the Board to exclude specified cases or classes from the section's operation.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Right of appeal to High Court preserves judicial review over advance rulings with limited condonation and streamlined procedure.
    Clause 389 grants a statutory right of appeal to the High Court against rulings or orders of the Board for Advance Rulings and certain Assessing Officer actions, mandates filing in the prescribed form and manner within a limited period, allows judicial condonation for a short additional interval, omits prior executive scheme-making and modification powers, and relies on Rule 44FA to integrate appeal procedure with jurisdictional High Court practice.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural autonomy for advance rulings enables the Board to set its own procedures, heightening calls for transparency and safeguards.
    Clause 388 vests the Board for Advance Rulings with broad power to regulate its own procedure, subject to the relevant Chapter, enabling the Board to prescribe filing rules, hearing modes, timelines, evidence protocols, order formats and confidentiality mechanisms, while the institutional shift from a quasi judicial Authority to an administrative Board raises concerns about explicit natural justice safeguards, transparency, consistency and the scope of judicial review.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Advance Rulings powers modernisation clarifies BAR's quasi judicial authority and civil court powers under reformed procedural codes.
    Clause 387 modernises the powers and status of the Board for Advance Rulings by vesting it with civil court powers to summon witnesses, compel document production, receive affidavit evidence and exercise other adjudicatory functions, and by deeming its proceedings to be judicial proceedings that attract penal consequences for perjury and related offences, while limiting the civil court status to specified purposes and aligning cross references with reformed procedural and penal codes.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Void ab initio of advance rulings: fraud or misrepresentation may nullify rulings and restore ordinary tax provisions.
    Clause 386 empowers the Board for Advance Rulings to declare an advance ruling void ab initio if found to have been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation, on representation by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or otherwise; the Act is to apply as if no ruling had been made (excluding the period the ruling was in force), and a copy of the order must be sent to the applicant and the tax authority.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional bar on parallel proceedings preserves advance rulings' exclusivity for resident applicants and prevents conflicting adjudication.
    Clause 385 imposes a jurisdictional bar barring income tax authorities and the Appellate Tribunal from deciding any issue for which a resident has filed an advance ruling application; the prohibition attaches on filing and pertains only to the specific issue raised, thereby preserving the exclusivity and predictability of the advance ruling mechanism while raising interpretive questions about the definition of "issue" and the treatment of pending proceedings.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Advance ruling procedure secures binding tax guidance with hearing rights, grounds for rejection, and mandatory communication.
    Clause 384 requires the Board for Advance Rulings to forward applications to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, call for records, and after examination either allow or reject applications. Rejection must follow an opportunity to be heard and a reasoned order, and orders must be communicated to the applicant and tax authorities. Mandatory exclusions include pending proceedings, fair market value determinations, and transactions prima facie designed for tax avoidance; if allowed, the Board must examine further material, hear the applicant or authorised representative, and pronounce a written ruling within the prescribed time frame.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Advance ruling procedure: streamlined application process with prescribed form, quadruplicate filing, fee and a thirty day withdrawal window.
    Clause 383 establishes a streamlined procedure for advance rulings: applications must state the specific question and be filed in the prescribed form and manner in quadruplicate, accompanied by a prescribed fee, and may be withdrawn within thirty days. The clause retains core procedural features of the prior regime but omits transitional and legacy transfer or opt-out provisions, leaving form, fee, and certain consequences of withdrawal to subordinate rules.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Vacancies and defects immunity preserves validity of advance rulings to prevent collateral challenges and ensure procedural continuity.
    Clause 382 stipulates that no proceeding before, or pronouncement of an advance ruling by, the Board for Advance Rulings shall be questioned or invalidated merely because of any vacancy or defect in the Board's constitution. It applies to both procedural actions and final rulings, reflects the de facto validity principle, and is intended to secure continuity, legal certainty, and protection against collateral procedural challenges, while not extending to defects that negate jurisdiction or involve fraud or bias.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Board for Advance Rulings centralizes administrative advance rulings, prioritizing efficiency but raising independence and legal robustness concerns.
    Clause 381 mandates constitution of one or more Board for Advance Rulings by notification, each comprising two members who are serving tax officers of not below Chief Commissioner rank, nominated by the Board; the provision preserves an administrative, officer-led model akin to the existing framework and emphasizes mandatory establishment, flexibility in number and phased operationalization, while leaving nomination criteria, judicial representation, publication, and appellate design unspecified.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Advance ruling mechanism provides pre transactional tax certainty and access controls for cross border and GAAR related issues.
    Clause 380 defines advance ruling across five categories: rulings for non resident applicants; rulings on transactions between residents and non residents; rulings for specified resident applicants; rulings on computation of total income pending before tax authorities or the Appellate Tribunal; and rulings on whether proposed arrangements are impermissible avoidance arrangements; it links applications to the Bill's procedural section and replaces the Authority with a Board for Advance Rulings, while preserving notification based resident eligibility.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Dispute Resolution Committee provides an opt-in ADR path reducing penalties and granting prosecution immunity for minor tax disputes.
    Clause 379 creates an opt in Dispute Resolution Committee to resolve minor tax disputes by allowing modification of assessment variations, reduction or waiver of penalties, and grant of immunity from prosecution, with Assessing Officers required to implement DRC directions within a prescribed short timeframe; eligibility is confined by a monetary ceiling on variations, exclusions for search/survey or international information cases, and an income threshold as reported in returns, while procedural details and disqualifications are to be prescribed in subordinate rules.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Set-off of tax refunds: authority to adjust refunds against outstanding dues with written intimation and time limited withholding.
    Clause 438 authorises specified tax officers to set off any refund due against sums remaining payable by the taxpayer, subject to mandatory written intimation. If assessment or reassessment proceedings are pending, the Assessing Officer may withhold the refund for a limited, time bound period, but only after recording reasons in writing and obtaining prior approval from the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner. The clause streamlines language from Section 245, narrows discretionary grounds for withholding by focusing on pendency of proceedings, and retains procedural safeguards without specifying priority among kinds of dues.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Interest on tax refunds: prescribed entitlement and computation rules ensure compensation for delayed refunds and administrative resolution.
    Clause 437 provides a statutory entitlement to interest on delayed tax refunds, specifying commencement dates for interest based on refund source (advance tax, TCS, tax treated as paid, self-assessment, rectification or excess payment), a materiality threshold exempting trivial refunds, extension of entitlement to deductors, exclusion of periods of delay attributable to the taxpayer or deductor, additional interest for appellate or revision order-related refunds, adjustment and recovery mechanisms for varied refund amounts, and administrative resolution of disputes on excluded periods by a senior tax authority.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Finality of assessments: refund claims limited to refunds for wrongly paid or excess tax, not re litigation of settled assessments.
    Clause 436 prevents an assessee, in refund claims, from questioning or seeking review of any assessment or matter that has become final and conclusive; relief in such claims is limited to refund of tax wrongly paid or paid in excess and the provision must be read with appeal, rectification and revision mechanisms to avoid undermining corrective powers elsewhere in the statute.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Automatic refunds on appellate or statutory orders require proactive AO disbursement, subject to reassessment and annulment limits.
    Automatic refunds are mandated when appellate or other statutory orders reduce or annul tax liability, requiring the Assessing Officer to refund excess amounts without a claim, except where the Act provides otherwise. Refunds become due only after a fresh assessment when an order directs reassessment, and where an assessment is annulled the refund is limited to the excess tax paid over tax chargeable on the returned total income. The provision preserves AO obligations, exceptions for set off or stay, and separates principal refund rules from interest entitlement.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    TDS refund mechanism for deductors clarifies eligibility, prescribed application procedure, and time bound AO orders.
    Clause 434 creates a statutory TDS refund mechanism allowing a deductor who, under a written agreement, bore withholding tax and later claims no deduction was legally required to apply for refund in the prescribed form; the Assessing Officer must inquire as necessary, provide the applicant an opportunity to be heard, and pass a written order allowing or rejecting the claim within the specified time frame.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Return-based refund claims must be made through the income tax return, tying refund limitation to return filing timelines.
    Clause 433 requires that every refund claim be made by furnishing the return of income under section 263, making return filing the exclusive procedural vehicle for refund claims and implicitly tying limitation to the return filing timelines without providing express condonation or separate application mechanisms.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Refund entitlement: clubbed-income payee and authorised representatives may claim tax refunds when taxpayer cannot act.
    The clause entitles the person in whose total income clubbed income is included to claim the refund attributable to that income, and authorises a legal representative, trustee, guardian or receiver to claim or receive refunds on behalf of a taxpayer who cannot do so because of death, incapacity, insolvency, liquidation or similar cause; procedural formalities and limitation issues are left to subordinate rules and practice.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tax refund entitlement preserved: statutory right maintained under new bill with procedural verification by Assessing Officer.
    Clause 431 preserves a statutory right to a refund where a person satisfies the Assessing Officer that tax paid, paid on or treated as paid on their behalf for a tax year exceeds the amount properly chargeable; it covers direct payments and deemed payments (TDS/TCS, advance tax), places an initial procedural burden on the taxpayer, and mirrors Section 237 of the 1961 Act except for the shift from assessment year to tax year, with attendant implications for temporal reference, procedural integration, and ancillary issues such as interest, set offs and standards of verification.

    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