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 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
  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.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Case LawsGST
    Retrospective Cancellation of GST Registration: Analysis of Delhi High Court’s Ruling in 2024 (1) ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Deciphering Tax Implications on Capital Reduction: Navigating the Complexities of Section 115QA in I...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Navigating Regulatory Compliance: Analysis of a CHA License Revocation and Restoration Case
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting Section 153A: ITAT Delhi's Stand on Incriminating Material in Assessments: Assessments ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reaffirming the Bounds of Section 153A: Analysis of Delhi High Court's Approach: Assessment post sea...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Rectification and Revised Returns: Legal Insights from ITAT Bangalore's Ruling
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Mutual Fund Gains and Deemed Dividends: Analyzing the Delhi High Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case LawsCustoms
    Judicial Scrutiny of Customs Seizure and Redemption under the Indian Legal Framework: Foreign Curren...
    Case LawsCustoms
    The Duty of Diligence: Understanding the Legal Implications for Customs Brokers
    Case LawsCustoms
    Legal Analysis of a Customs Appeal Case Involving Mandatory Pre-Deposit Requirements
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Legal Elucidation of Homeopathic Product Classification under Central Excise Tariff Act: Medicament ...
    Case LawsIBC
    The Supreme Court's In-Depth Ruling on Corporate Insolvency: Legal Implications Explored
    Case LawsPMLA
    Money Laundering and Bail: Supreme Court's Interpretation of Section 45 PMLA
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessing Income under Section 147 Post-Quashment of Sections 153A/153C: The Waiver of Limitation ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 153A of the Income Tax Act: A Critical Analysis of the Supreme Court's Interpretation in the...
    Case LawsPMLA
    The Intersection of Politics, Corruption, and Judicial Review: A Case Study: Validity of order of Hi...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Clarity and Precision in Tax Penalty Proceedings: Insights from a High Court Judgment
    Case LawsIBC
    NCLAT's Authority to Recall Judgments: The Intersection of Tribunal Authority and Justice
    Case LawsGST
    Detention and Release of Goods under CGST Act: Discrepancies in the CGST registration of the consign...
    Case LawsGST
    The Detention of Goods under GST Law: Doubts regarding the genuineness of the consignee
❮
❯
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
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 SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsGST
    Retrospective Cancellation of GST Registration: Analysis of Delhi High Court’s Ruling in 2024 (1) ...
    Show AI Summary
    Retrospective GST cancellation: court limits retroactive effect, stressing objective grounds and hearing rights for taxpayers.
    The court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration cannot be applied mechanically and must be supported by objective grounds; mere non-filing does not automatically justify cancelling registration for earlier compliant periods. Procedural fairness requires an opportunity of being heard before imposing retrospective cancellation, and the temporal effect of cancellation should align with the taxpayer's cancellation application rather than an earlier retrospective date, given potential impacts such as denial of input tax credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Deciphering Tax Implications on Capital Reduction: Navigating the Complexities of Section 115QA in I...
    Show AI Summary
    Capital reduction transactions treated outside buyback levy when executed pre amendment; buyback tax not attracted.
    The Tribunal held that the capital reduction did not qualify as a buyback for purposes of the buyback tax provision because the transaction was completed before the amendment that broadened the provision's definition; relying on precedents distinguishing capital reduction from buybacks, the Tribunal rejected the revenue's tax avoidance contention and emphasised that the transaction date governs applicability of the amended definition.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Navigating Regulatory Compliance: Analysis of a CHA License Revocation and Restoration Case
    Show AI Summary
    Non transferability of CHA license: unauthorized sub letting triggered revocation, later reconsidered due to appellant hardship.
    A licensed CHA was found to have contravened CHALR by effectively transferring operational control to a Mumbai office through a Power of Attorney, breaching non transferability, CHA obligations to obtain authorisations and exercise due diligence, and supervision duties over employees; the firm was held accountable where the licence was used for financial gain.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting Section 153A: ITAT Delhi's Stand on Incriminating Material in Assessments: Assessments ...
    Show AI Summary
    Incriminating material requirement: Section 153A assessments require material specific to the assessee, not unrelated third party statements.
    Assessments following search operations must be grounded on incriminating material specifically linked to the assessee; material or statements derived from separate or third party search proceedings cannot, alone, serve as incriminating material against an unrelated assessee. Absent assesseespecific incriminating material, additions and disallowances in such assessments lack justification and cannot properly form the basis of adverse tax adjustments.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reaffirming the Bounds of Section 153A: Analysis of Delhi High Court's Approach: Assessment post sea...
    Show AI Summary
    Admissibility of search statements: corroborative evidence required before additions in post-search tax assessments.
    Statements recorded under Section 132(4) have evidentiary value but cannot alone justify additions under Section 153A; corroborative material discovered during the search is required, and taxpayers must be afforded the opportunity to cross-examine and rebut adverse statements before assessments under Section 153A are finalized.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Rectification and Revised Returns: Legal Insights from ITAT Bangalore's Ruling
    Show AI Summary
    Rectification under Section 154: procedural lapses should not bar correction of apparent errors in tax returns.
    Interpretation of Section 154 treats misplacement of figures in an original return as a mistake apparent from the record, qualifying for statutory rectification; a revised return filed as a genuine corrective attempt may be recognised despite procedural lapses, and tax authorities should balance procedural compliance with the need to remedy apparent errors and assist taxpayers in claiming corrections.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Mutual Fund Gains and Deemed Dividends: Analyzing the Delhi High Court's Landmark Judgment
    Show AI Summary
    Classification of Mutual Fund Gains: affirmed as capital gains, clarifies tests distinguishing business income and scope of deemed dividends.
    Classification of gains from mutual fund redemptions turns on intent, transaction frequency, holding period, accounting treatment and the factual matrix to determine capital gains versus business income. Distinguishing genuine capital contributions from transactions that function as distributions is essential before treating receipts as deemed dividends; absent characteristics of a loan or advance against profits, capital infusions should not be recharacterised as dividends.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Judicial Scrutiny of Customs Seizure and Redemption under the Indian Legal Framework: Foreign Curren...
    Show AI Summary
    Redemption under Customs Act: deemed payment recognized as exercising the redemption option despite pandemic-related delay.
    The judgment analyzes the redemption option under the Customs Act allowing fine payment in lieu of confiscation, focusing on the prescribed timeframe and on how actions by a petitioner while seized currency remains with the department can constitute exercise of that option. Considering pandemic-related disruption, the court applied purposive interpretation and concluded the department's refusal to accept a deemed payment was unjustified and that the petitioner's steps effectively availed the statutory redemption alternative.
    Case LawsCustoms
    The Duty of Diligence: Understanding the Legal Implications for Customs Brokers
    Show AI Summary
    Duty to exercise due diligence: strict licensing compliance can justify administrative revocation and security forfeiture for brokers.
    The headnote focuses on the duty of diligence under the CBLR 2018, identifying failures to advise clients, to verify information, and to supervise employees as breaches that can attract administrative penalties against a customs broker's licence. It also confirms that regulatory action may be initiated at the broker's registered location regardless of where the underlying transactions occurred, and highlights the need for compliance programs, client advisory practices, and employee training.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Legal Analysis of a Customs Appeal Case Involving Mandatory Pre-Deposit Requirements
    Show AI Summary
    Mandatory pre-deposit requirement: payments made during investigation can be counted toward the appeal pre-deposit, protecting access to appeal.
    Interpretation of the pre-deposit requirement focuses on counting payments made during investigation toward the mandatory deposit for appellate admissibility; authorities must account for investigation-stage deposits when assessing compliance to avoid denying appeal rights on technical grounds and to give effect to substantive payment.
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Legal Elucidation of Homeopathic Product Classification under Central Excise Tariff Act: Medicament ...
    Show AI Summary
    Medicament classification confirmed for a homeopathic hair oil based on ingredients and ordinary perception under tariff law.
    Classification of a homeopathic hair oil as a medicament depends on the ingredients test and the common parlance test. The Tribunal treated AHAHO as a medicament because it contained recognised homeopathic constituents and was labelled under the homeopathic schedule; the Supreme Court affirmed that those medicinal ingredients and the product's perception as a homeopathic medicine outweigh cosmetic imagery and over the counter availability, and that tariff amendments did not change the classificatory result.
    Case LawsIBC
    The Supreme Court's In-Depth Ruling on Corporate Insolvency: Legal Implications Explored
    Show AI Summary
    Resolution applicant eligibility under insolvency law can be disqualified by trust and company conflicts affecting CIRP participation.
    The judgment finds that valuation disclosures and newspaper publication of Form G met CIRP regulatory requirements despite website upload issues; materially revised resolution plans must be placed before the Committee of Creditors or are procedurally irregular; commercial wisdom of the CoC governs differential treatment of creditors subject to legal compliance; promoter settlement offers and Section 12-A applications require demonstrable CoC consideration; and resolution applicant eligibility is governed by Trusts Act and Companies Act conflicts, not by assumed disqualifications absent specific disqualification orders.
    Case LawsPMLA
    Money Laundering and Bail: Supreme Court's Interpretation of Section 45 PMLA
    Show AI Summary
    Section 45 PMLA bail standard: stringent satisfaction required on non guilt and low risk of reoffence before granting bail.
    Interpretation of Section 45 PMLA requires a stringent bail standard: courts must be satisfied on reasonable grounds that the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit an offence while on bail. An Enforcement Directorate investigation under the PMLA is distinct from predicate offence inquiries, so completion of predicate investigations does not substitute for the specific assessment required under the PMLA; courts must therefore evaluate the seriousness of allegations and the stage and character of the ED probe when considering bail.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessing Income under Section 147 Post-Quashment of Sections 153A/153C: The Waiver of Limitation ...
    Show AI Summary
    Reopening assessments under Section 147 requires proper review when Section 150(2) waiver is contested, not clarification.
    Reopening of assessments under Section 147 concerns whether the Assessing Officer has a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and is subject to procedural safeguards including issuance of a statutory notice. Where prior assessments made in consequence of a search under provisions for search-based assessment were quashed, the question arises whether fresh proceedings may be initiated for income not arising from incriminating material found in the search and whether the limitation period can be waived under Section 150(2) to permit issuance of a notice for reassessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 153A of the Income Tax Act: A Critical Analysis of the Supreme Court's Interpretation in the...
    Show AI Summary
    Scope of assessment post-search: completed assessments permit additions only from incriminating material found during searches.
    The Supreme Court clarified that for assessments completed before a search, the Assessing Officer's power to reassess within the retrospective period is constrained: any additions in such completed assessments must be based on incriminating material discovered during the search, thereby limiting use of search powers to matters tied to the unearthed evidence and preventing expansion of assessments on unrelated material.
    Case LawsPMLA
    The Intersection of Politics, Corruption, and Judicial Review: A Case Study: Validity of order of Hi...
    Show AI Summary
    Judicial oversight of criminal investigations must be cautious to avoid unwarranted de novo probes that disrupt investigative progress.
    The commentary critiques a High Court-ordered de novo investigation into recruitment corruption, treating such measures as extraordinary remedies that should not unsettle substantial prior investigative work. It stresses judicial discipline and adherence to precedent, warns against collusion and political interference in inquiries, recognises expanded locus standi for third parties in complex cases, affirms confidentiality of confession material with limited exceptions, and outlines the Enforcement Directorate's powers in probing and recovering proceeds of money laundering.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Clarity and Precision in Tax Penalty Proceedings: Insights from a High Court Judgment
    Show AI Summary
    Specificity in penalty notices: requirement to identify exact charge prevents defective proceedings and safeguards procedural fairness.
    Applicability of penalty for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars requires the assessing officer to specify the exact limb under which proceedings are initiated; absence of that specificity renders the penalty notice defective, undermines procedural fairness, and justifies setting aside the penalty, thereby obliging tax authorities to adhere to precise notice requirements when invoking penal provisions.
    Case LawsIBC
    NCLAT's Authority to Recall Judgments: The Intersection of Tribunal Authority and Justice
    Show AI Summary
    Inherent jurisdiction to recall judgments affirms tribunals can correct proceedings tainted by procedural vitiation or jurisdictional defect.
    The tribunal recognised its inherent jurisdiction to recall judgments distinct from review, holding that recall is available where procedural vitiation, fraud, lack of jurisdiction or failure of natural justice renders a proceeding a nullity. Drawing on the tribunal rules analogue to residual civil-procedure power and higher-court authority, the tribunal treated recall as an incidental order to prevent abuse of process and to correct proceedings affected by jurisdictional defect or gross procedural lapse.
    Case LawsGST
    Detention and Release of Goods under CGST Act: Discrepancies in the CGST registration of the consign...
    Show AI Summary
    Detention and release under Section 129: proper tax invoice and e way bill establish owner status and permit release.
    Where goods intercepted in transit show a proper tax invoice and a valid e way bill identifying the consignor/consignee, those documents establish ownership for purposes of Section 129 and direct application of the release provision applicable when the owner comes forward; documentary compliance thus determines which release regime applies where GST registration discrepancies are alleged.
    Case LawsGST
    The Detention of Goods under GST Law: Doubts regarding the genuineness of the consignee
    Show AI Summary
    Detention of goods under GST: enforcement must assess consignee genuineness and documentary compliance before imposing penalties.
    Detention of goods in transit was contested where authorities suspected the consignee's genuineness despite production of a tax invoice and an E way bill; the Court directed that enforcement action distinguish between penalty provisions and alternative statutory mechanisms, require strict procedural fairness, assess documentary evidence and consignee identity, and remit the matter for fresh administrative consideration accordingly.

    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

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters
      Income Tax

      Comparison of SCHEDULE II "INCOME NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN TOTAL INCOME" 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

      SCHEDULE II INCOME NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN TOTAL INCOME

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      SCHEDULE II sets out classes of income that are excluded from "total income" for income-tax purposes. The Bill (Old Version) and the enacted Act differ in several material respects affecting life-insurance exclusions, pension/NPS entries, references to International Financial Services Centre (IFSC) entities, and the inclusion of equalisation-levy income. Affected parties include policyholders, insurers, employers, employees, pension subscribers, IFSC entities and tax authorities. Effective dates are stated within specific entries (for example, policy issue periods and 1 April 2002/2023) where provided; no single overarching commencement date for the Schedule is stated in the Bill text.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: SCHEDULE II (See section 11) - "Income not to be included in total income." The Schedule lists categories of exempt income (column B) subject to conditions (column C). Definitions and notes at the end assign meanings to terms used in the table. The Bill (Old Version) is the source document for this commentary. Any differences vis-`a-vis the enacted Act are identified only insofar as both texts were provided; where a detail is absent in the Bill text, the phrase "Not stated in the document." has been used.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The Schedule enumerates 16 heads of income excluded from total income, including: agricultural income; sums under life-insurance policies (with sub-conditions tied to period of issue, premium-to-sum-assured ratios and aggregate premium ceilings); provident fund and recognised provident fund payments (with carve-outs for interest on large contributions on/after 1 April 2021); payments under Sukanya Samriddhi, National Pension System (NPS) Trust, Agniveer Corpus Fund, approved superannuation funds; scholarships; awards/rewards instituted or approved by government; interest or other receipts on specified government securities and deposits; interest on gold bonds/certificates; interest on bonds issued by local authorities or State Pooled Finance Entities; income on transfer of certain UTI units; income chargeable to equalisation levy (new insertion); and specific categories u/s 10(15) and related provisions of the 1961 Act as applicable.

      Interpretation

      The text frames exclusions as conditional: each head is subject to prescribed conditions and definitions in accompanying notes. Legislative intent, as discernible from the Bill text, is to preserve traditional exemptions (agriculture, certain pensions, scholarships, specified government securities) while tightening or clarifying tax-exempt treatment for life-insurance receipts and retirement/savings vehicles by reference to issue dates, premium ratios, aggregate premium ceilings and contribution thresholds. The insertion of equalisation-levy related exclusion (Sl. No. 15) signals explicit recognition of overlap between equalisation-levy chargeability and income-tax neutrality for certain cross-border digital services.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Key carve-outs and conditions provided in the Bill include:

      • Life-insurance sums excluded only if policies meet period-specific premium-to-sum-assured ratios and, for certain periods, aggregate premium ceilings (Rs. 2,50,000 or Rs. 5,00,000) - and certain sums (section 127 receipts; Keyman policies) are expressly ineligible.
      • Portions of interest on provident fund/recognised provident fund balances attributable to contributions on/after 1 April 2021 are not eligible for exclusion where contributions exceed specified thresholds (Rs.5,00,000 / Rs.2,50,000) and the amount not excluded is to be computed as prescribed.
      • NPS payments excluded only to the extent they do not exceed 60% of the total amount payable on closure/opt-out.
      • Approved superannuation fund payments are exempt only in specified circumstances (death, commutation at retirement/age, refund in limited cases, transfer to specified pension schemes).
      • Equalisation-levy related incomes are excluded only where not chargeable as royalty/FTS in India under agreements notified u/s 159 (explicit exception in Sl. No. 15).

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A unit-linked life policy issued on 1 Oct 2023 with annual premium such that premium-to-sum-assured ratio is 12% and aggregate premium per tax year is Rs.2,00,000 - the Bill permits exclusion if it meets the Item 2 conditions (unit-linked post-1-April-2023: ratio <=15% for special, <=10% for others; aggregate <=Rs.2,50,000 for ULIP). Whether treated as "special policy" depends on disability/disease status u/rs - Not stated in the document.
      • Example 2: An employee receives accumulated recognised provident fund balance including interest attributable to contributions of Rs.6,00,000 made on/after 1 April 2021 in a year when no employer contribution was made - interest attributable to that contribution is not eligible for exclusion (threshold exceeded Rs.5,00,000); the portion not excluded to be computed as prescribed (procedure Not stated in the document).

      Interplay

      The Bill references other statutory instruments and provisions: Section 11 (hook), Section 127 (for life-insurance ineligibility), Schedule XI para 8, Schedule XV (definition of "actual capital sum assured"), Insurance Regulatory regulations, the Provident Funds Act, Government Savings Promotion Act (Sukanya Samriddhi), Dept. notifications regarding NPS (notifications not reproduced in the Bill text), Finance Act, 2016 (equalisation levy Chapter VIII) and section 159 agreements. The Bill contemplates Board guidelines for removal of difficulties. Where computation methods are required ("as prescribed"), the Bill defers to rules/regulations; these procedural details are Not stated in the document.

      Differences between the Bill (Old Version) and the Enacted Act - Practical Impact

      TopicBill (Old Version)Act (2025) - Differences & Practical Impact
      Reference to IFSC in life-insurance entryExclusion clause expressly excludes policies issued by "International Financial Services Centre insurance intermediary office" from the general test; IFSC office language appears within clause (a).

      The Act broadens IFSC coverage differently (references to "International Financial Services Centre Insurance Office") and later adds a special carve-out that aggregate premium conditions do not apply to policies issued on or after 1 April 2025 by the IFSC Insurance Office.

      Practical impact: IFSC-issued policies post-1-Apr-2025 enjoy relaxed aggregate-premium limits under the Act versus the Bill - this benefits IFSC policyholders and insurers.

      Section reference for ineligible insurance sumsIneligibility lists section 127 (no subsection reference) and Keyman policies.

      The Act specifies "section 127(4)" as ineligible; this narrows or clarifies which portion of section 127 is meant.

      Practical impact: narrower/clearer exclusion scope for section 127 receipts, reducing interpretive ambiguity.

      Aggregate premium thresholds for policies issued on/after 1-Apr-2023ULIPs: aggregate <=Rs.2,50,000; other policies: aggregate <=Rs.5,00,000.

      The Act restates these ceilings but then adds the IFSC carve-out for policies issued on/after 1-Apr-2025.

      Practical impact: domestic policyholders unchanged, IFSC policyholders gain advantage.

      NPS-related entries (Sl. Nos. 15 & 16)The Bill lacks specific entries for "lump sum amount" defined by a particular notification and for Unified Pension Scheme subscriber-specific references.

      The Act adds two discrete entries (Sl. Nos. 15 and 16) dealing with NPS payments to Unified Pension Scheme subscribers and "lump sum amount" per a departmental notification dated 24 Jan 2025.

      Practical impact: greater specificity and targeted exemption for Unified Pension Scheme subscribers under NPS, linking to a concrete notification (FX-1/3/2024-PR). This reduces uncertainty for affected NPS subscribers.

      Equalisation levy incomeBill includes Sl. No. 15 addressing income chargeable to equalisation levy.

      The Act omits the Bill's Sl. No. 15 equalisation-levy entry or shifts numbering; comparison shows the Act instead includes other NPS-related items.

      Practical impact: the treatment of equalisation-levy incomes requires reconciliation between Act text and prior Bill; taxpayers relying on the Bill's exclusion must verify the final Act wording (Not stated in the document).

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Life-insurance exclusions carry detailed temporal and quantitative conditions (period of issue, premium-to-sum-assured ratio, aggregate premium ceilings). Insurers and policyholders must verify issue date classifications and compute premium ratios and aggregate premiums across the policy term. The explicit ineligibility for keyman policies and section 127 receipts increases scrutiny over policy ownership and assignment.
      • NPS and provident fund entries impose record-keeping obligations: authorities and subscribers must track contributions made on or after 1 April 2021 separately, and identify portions of interest attributable to contributions exceeding thresholds. The method of computing the amount not excluded is left to prescribed rules - until rules are notified, potential uncertainty persists.
      • Equalisation-levy clause (Sl. No. 15): taxpayers and digital service providers should reconcile equalisation-levy exposure and Income-tax chargeability; the clause excludes income chargeable to equalisation levy except where the income is otherwise taxable in India as royalty/FTS under notified agreements (thus creating an interplay with tax treaty determinations and notifications u/s 159).
      • IFSC references: the Bill treats certain IFSC insurance intermediary office receipts differently in the life-insurance entry (exclusion/inclusion language differs versus the Act). Parties operating within IFSCs should note the special treatment and any administrative guidance forthcoming.
      • Procedural uncertainty: multiple entries defer to "as prescribed" computations and to notifications by the Central Government; until those are issued, taxpayers face interpretation and compliance risk. The Board's power to issue binding guidelines (with Central Government approval) is preserved, indicating administrative rule-making will shape practical application.

      Key Takeaways

      • The Bill retains traditional exemptions (agriculture, scholarships, certain pension/retirement receipts) while imposing quantified tests on insurance exclusions (period-specific ratios and aggregate premium ceilings).
      • Interest on provident fund balances attributable to large post-1-April-2021 contributions is explicitly excluded from exemption, with thresholds (Rs.5,00,000 / Rs.2,50,000) and prescribed computation methods.
      • Equalisation-levy related income is newly addressed - excluded except where taxable in India as royalty/FTS under notified agreements.
      • Certain specific sums are expressly excluded from insurance exemption (section 127 receipts; Keyman insurance), tightening the prior broader language.
      • Several entries defer key operational questions to rules/notifications; substantial administrative guidance is required to operationalise the Schedule.

      Full Text:

      SCHEDULE II INCOME NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN TOTAL INCOME

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax
      Next ➔