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 LawsIncome Tax
    TDS and International Transactions: Categorization of Payments under the ambit of "royalty" or "fees...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Assessment u/s 153C and Unexplained Investments: A Case Study in Legal Reasoning
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Delhi High Court Elucidates on the Scope of Section 80IA in the Context of Business Expansion: Inter...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Penalty Limitations and Reasonable Cause: Navigating the Nuances of Tax Penalties
    Case LawsIBC
    Joint Insolvency Applications in Real Estate and Fulfillment of Threshold under IBC: Limitation and ...
    Case LawsGST
    Digital Authentication in Tax Notices and the Interplay of Sections 61 and 74 in GST Law: Exploring ...
    Case LawsGST
    Confirmation of GST demand by adjudicating Show Cause notice u/s 73: Procedural Requirements and Fai...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Customs Duty of an EOU and the Fate of Obsolete Imports: Destroying Obsolete Goods without Paying Du...
    Case LawsPMLA
    Understanding the Bail Denial: Case Analysis of a Money Laundering Offense
    Case LawsGST
    When Taxpayers Make Mistakes in Filing GST Returns: Understanding the Legal Aspect of GST Rectificat...
    Case LawsIBC
    Navigating Insolvency Proceedings: Understanding CoC's Role and Section 65 of IBC in Corporate Liqu...
    Case LawsGST
    In-depth Legal Examination of a High-Profile Tax Evasion and Forgery Case: Bail Application Denied
    Case LawsGST
    Unraveling the Inverted Duty Structure: Complexities of ITC Refunds in GST
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Reasonable Time for Adjudication of Show Cause Notice (SCN): The law requires authorities to exercis...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Navigating the Legal Labyrinth of Second-Hand Goods Import: The Intersection of Trade Policy and Jud...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Income Tax Return Delays: High Court Rules on Tax Authority's Decision-Making Boundaries
    Case LawsGST
    Navigating Tax Law Complexities: judicial approach towards the adjudication and appeal process
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Interplay of Sales and Bogus Purchases in Tax Evasion Cases: Assessing Tax Evasion Allegations
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Proportionality and Evidence in Tax Assessments: Accommodation entries, Bogus Purchase and Estimatio...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) Non-Deposit: Protecting the Rights of Taxpayers Ag...
❮
❯
❯❯
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 LawsIncome Tax
    TDS and International Transactions: Categorization of Payments under the ambit of "royalty" or "fees...
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty vs fees for included services: classification of cross border lead generation payments determines TDS obligation under tax treaty.
    Categorisation of cross border payments as royalty or fees for included services under the India US DTAA determines withholding under Section 195. Royalties cover payments for use of intellectual property; fees for included services require that technical knowledge, skill, or know how be made available. Services limited to lead generation, databases, or market facilitation without transfer of proprietary technical content do not qualify as either category and therefore fall outside the DTAA based TDS obligation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Assessment u/s 153C and Unexplained Investments: A Case Study in Legal Reasoning
    Show AI Summary
    Search-based assessment jurisdiction governs treatment of unexplained investments when records are absent, shifting the burden of proof to the assessee.
    Assessment based on search-derived incriminating material applies when jurisdiction under search-based assessment is not contested, and unexplained investments are taxed depending on whether amounts are recorded in books of account. The assessee bears the onus to explain investments; absence of records, non-filing of returns and non-cooperation justify adverse inferences. Procedural elements such as delay condonation, set-aside orders and cooperation in reassessment affect the assessment process, while interest for non-furnishing of returns is tied to the timing of the regular assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Delhi High Court Elucidates on the Scope of Section 80IA in the Context of Business Expansion: Inter...
    Show AI Summary
    Scope of Section 80IA: expansion within the same undertaking does not automatically forfeit tax holiday eligibility.
    The court considered whether adding services and acquiring additional licenses by a telecommunications company created a new "undertaking" for tax holiday purposes. Finding that the company continued its original business using largely the same infrastructure and manpower, the court endorsed the Tribunal's conclusion that expansion within the same operational framework does not automatically constitute a separate undertaking and should not defeat eligibility for the tax holiday intended to encourage capital intensive projects.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Penalty Limitations and Reasonable Cause: Navigating the Nuances of Tax Penalties
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation for tax penalties: emphasis on initiation of action preserves enforcement; reasonable cause evaluated by business realities.
    Applicability of the limitation period is determined by the initiation of action rather than the formal start of penalty proceedings, making the triggering of enforcement activity the operative moment for limitation. The reasonable cause doctrine is applied with attention to the appellant's bank like operations despite its cooperative structure, recognizing long standing practices and business realities as bearing on culpability for transaction handling contraventions.
    Case LawsIBC
    Joint Insolvency Applications in Real Estate and Fulfillment of Threshold under IBC: Limitation and ...
    Show AI Summary
    Joint application maintainability under IBC: interconnected real estate defaults can meet allottee threshold despite limitation objections.
    Maintainability of a joint application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is supported where separate corporate participants in a real estate project have interconnected obligations, allowing joinder in a single filing. The creditor threshold for initiating insolvency by allottees can include claims affected by limitation when the default is a continuous breach, producing a continuing cause of action under the Limitation Act and thereby supporting counting such claims toward the allottee threshold.
    Case LawsGST
    Digital Authentication in Tax Notices and the Interplay of Sections 61 and 74 in GST Law: Exploring ...
    Show AI Summary
    Digital authentication of tax notices enables enforcement despite verification procedures not being an absolute prerequisite for punitive action.
    The analysis focuses on the legal effect of digitally authenticated GST portal notices, the sufficiency of portal-based service for triggering taxpayer obligations, and the distinction between routine verification of returns and discretionary enforcement actions for suspected fraudulent defaults; it observes that verification is not an absolute prerequisite to initiate enforcement where officers reasonably suspect fraud, and that failure to engage with portal notices weakens natural justice claims.
    Case LawsGST
    Confirmation of GST demand by adjudicating Show Cause notice u/s 73: Procedural Requirements and Fai...
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice breach: non self contained, short notice show cause demands require reissuance with fair opportunity.
    A show cause notice initiating an adjudicatory demand must be self contained, supply sufficient material for response, and afford a reasonable opportunity to reply; an inadequate content and an unreasonably short response period (well below the preferred thirty days and below a minimum of fifteen days) violate audi alteram partem and procedural fairness. Defective notices warrant issuance of a fresh, legally valid notice rectifying the procedural defects, and may attract costs consequences against the issuing authority.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Customs Duty of an EOU and the Fate of Obsolete Imports: Destroying Obsolete Goods without Paying Du...
    Show AI Summary
    Destruction of obsolete imports: destruction with Customs permission can relieve full customs duty subject to procedural compliance.
    Whether imported raw materials and components rendered obsolete may be destroyed without paying customs duty where the unit obtains Customs permission and offers to pay duty on scrap value; reliance was placed on the Foreign Trade Policy, Circular No. 60/1999 Cus and an amendment to the governing Notification which exempts duty when goods are destroyed with Customs' permission, balanced against the Revenue's contention that non use within prescribed time attracts duty.
    Case LawsPMLA
    Understanding the Bail Denial: Case Analysis of a Money Laundering Offense
    Show AI Summary
    Money laundering offence: bail refused where admissible witness statements and accused failed to discharge burden showing non involvement.
    Bail was refused where admissible witness statements provided a prima facie basis to implicate the appellant in money laundering and the accused failed to show non involvement or low risk of reoffending. Money laundering was treated as an independent offence tied to dealings in proceeds, admissible statements supported inferences from financial transactions and concealment, parity was held non automatic, and discretionary release for trial delay does not guarantee bail in serious economic offences.
    Case LawsGST
    When Taxpayers Make Mistakes in Filing GST Returns: Understanding the Legal Aspect of GST Rectificat...
    Show AI Summary
    GST rectification: inadvertent filing errors may be amended when no revenue loss, encouraging taxpayer-friendly compliance.
    Rectification of GST return entries is permissible where errors are inadvertent and do not cause revenue loss. The court interprets CGST/MGST filing and correction provisions purposively, recognising practical difficulties faced by taxpayers and the central importance of accurate returns for downstream GST processes. Authorities are urged to permit amendments by online or manual means in cases of genuine mistake without fiscal prejudice, promoting a taxpayer friendly and pragmatic approach consistent with other high court decisions.
    Case LawsIBC
    Navigating Insolvency Proceedings: Understanding CoC's Role and Section 65 of IBC in Corporate Liqu...
    Show AI Summary
    CoC autonomy in insolvency: CoC may decide liquidation prior to plan confirmation and section 65 targets malicious filings.
    Committee of Creditors autonomy over liquidation is recognized: the CoC may lawfully decide liquidation under Section 33(2) before confirmation of a resolution plan, and Section 65 requires clear evidence of filings made for purposes other than insolvency resolution before imposing penal consequences.
    Case LawsGST
    In-depth Legal Examination of a High-Profile Tax Evasion and Forgery Case: Bail Application Denied
    Show AI Summary
    Bail considerations: Serious economic offence allegations constrain pretrial liberty when evidence tampering and investigative integrity risks exist.
    Bail considerations focus on the seriousness of alleged tax evasion, forgery and conspiracy under the IPC, the risk of evidence tampering or witness influence, and the accused's antecedents; ongoing investigation complexity and public interest in protecting the exchequer weigh against interim release. Arguments relying on GST compounding or procedural non-compliance are distinguished from IPC offences, and precedents concerning customs or GST matters are treated as contextually different when assessing pretrial liberty.
    Case LawsGST
    Unraveling the Inverted Duty Structure: Complexities of ITC Refunds in GST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit refund: prior IGST refunds do not bar unutilized ITC claims; supporting evidence required for reconsideration.
    The court analysed entitlement to refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit under an inverted duty structure and held that prior IGST refunds for zero-rated supplies do not automatically bar a Section 54 refund claim; absence of debit entries alone cannot justify rejection. The decision emphasises the requirement to submit comprehensive supporting documents distinguishing inputs affected by the inverted duty structure and directs reconsideration allowing additional evidence and a reasoned order consistent with statutory conditions and principles of natural justice.
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Reasonable Time for Adjudication of Show Cause Notice (SCN): The law requires authorities to exercis...
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable Time for Adjudication: undue delay undermines natural justice and precludes indefinite postponement of proceedings.
    Adjudication of an excise Show Cause Notice must occur within a reasonable time so as to preserve evidentiary integrity and witness availability; prolonged inaction between issuance of an SCN and hearing prejudices the respondent, infringes the principles of natural justice, and requires statutory time-limit language to be interpreted to prevent indefinite delay.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Navigating the Legal Labyrinth of Second-Hand Goods Import: The Intersection of Trade Policy and Jud...
    Show AI Summary
    Second-hand goods import classification clarified: multifunction capital equipment falls under unrestricted category, subject to compliance and duty measures.
    The court determined that imported second-hand multifunction print and copying machines fall within the Foreign Trade Policy 2023 unrestricted category I(d) for second-hand capital goods and were incorrectly classified as prohibited by customs; it contrasted the 2023 and 2019 policies, relied on precedent, and directed the customs department to pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time while permitting provisional measures subject to enhanced duty payment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Income Tax Return Delays: High Court Rules on Tax Authority's Decision-Making Boundaries
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: focus on admissibility of the request, not the substantive merits of the tax claim.
    The legal principle requires that the authorized officer considering a condonation application under Section 119(2)(b) confine inquiry to the admissibility of the request and the justification for delay; assessment of the substantive merits of the taxpayer's income or loss claim is not part of the condonation exercise, and evidentiary review is limited to matters relevant to excusing the delay.
    Case LawsGST
    Navigating Tax Law Complexities: judicial approach towards the adjudication and appeal process
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under CGST law prompts appeal remedy and partial refund direction, preserving pre-deposit and taxpayer rights.
    The adjudicating officer withdrew the demand for inadmissible input tax credit and related interest and penalty, while separately imposing a penalty under Section 122(1)(vii) of the CGST Act adjusted against amounts paid by the petitioner. The court recognized the petitioner's appellate remedy and directed a partial refund subject to retention as pre-deposit, reflecting the procedural interplay between administrative adjudication and judicial review and safeguarding taxpayer rights during appeal.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Interplay of Sales and Bogus Purchases in Tax Evasion Cases: Assessing Tax Evasion Allegations
    Show AI Summary
    Interplay of sales and bogus purchases: sales consistency limits rejection of purchases and favors gross profit alignment for taxation.
    For traders, rejection of purchases cannot proceed in isolation where declared sales exhibit regularity; cost of goods sold must be coherent with recorded sales. Tax adjustments should compare differential gross profit margins and align challenged purchases with genuine GP rates, allowing proportional taxation reconciliations rather than adding the entire value of disputed purchases as income.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Proportionality and Evidence in Tax Assessments: Accommodation entries, Bogus Purchase and Estimatio...
    Show AI Summary
    Proportionality in tax assessments preserved: additions limited to profit element where sales are accepted, not entire purchase.
    Alleged accommodation entries may be restricted to taxation of the profit element where sales from those purchases are accepted; the tribunal limited an addition accordingly and the court upheld that proportionality. Separately, an enhanced gross profit addition was deleted because there was no concrete evidence to displace the assessee's declared book results; the court agreed that revenue must meet the evidentiary burden before altering declared figures.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) Non-Deposit: Protecting the Rights of Taxpayers Ag...
    Show AI Summary
    Tax Deducted at Source protection: taxpayers not liable for employer's failure to deposit TDS; refunds should not be adjusted.
    The note explains that TDS credit protection bars holding an assessee liable for tax already deducted by an employer who failed to remit it; employers bear the deposit obligation as tax-collecting agents. Adjusting taxpayer refunds or using coercive measures to recover demands arising from employer non-deposit contravenes the protective principle and indirect recovery limits, and authorities should correct credit mismatches rather than treat deductees as liable.

    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 XVI "PERMITTED MODES OF INVESTMENT OR DEPOSITS" between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      18 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Print Options

      SCHEDULE XVI - PERMITTED MODES OF INVESTMENT OR DEPOSITS

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      The provided documents are two versions of SCHEDULE-XVI (Permitted Modes of Investment or Deposits) related to section 350 of the Income-tax legislation as presented in (a) "SCHEDULE-XVI of Income-tax Act, 2025" (Document 1) and (b) "SCHEDULE-XVI of Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version" (Document 2). Both list permissible investment/deposit modes for registered non-profit / charitable or religious trusts or institutions. The differences between the two texts are principally editorial and ordering/wording differences and a few numbering/clauses variations; they do not indicate new substantive modes in the Old Version beyond those in the Act version provided. Affected parties: charitable/religious trusts, registered non-profit organisations, tax administrators and financial intermediaries. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: See section 350 (referenced) and the schedule title SCHEDULE XVI. The schedule specifies the "modes of investing or depositing the money referred to in section 350" and therefore regulates the forms in which corpus or funds of charitable/religious trusts and institutions (or registered non-profit organisations) may be maintained to retain tax benefits or compliance with section 350. The schedule enumerates specific permitted instruments, investments, deposits and certain transitional and historical exceptions. Definitions are provided within the schedule (see paragraph providing definitions such as "long-term finance", "public company", "urban infrastructure", "Immovable property", "incubatee", "incubator").

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The schedule enumerates discrete permitted modes of investment/deposit for monies u/s 350. Coverage: central government small savings instruments (savings certificates, small savings schemes), Post Office Savings Bank, scheduled banks and cooperative banks, Unit Trust of India units, securities issued by Central/State Governments, government-guaranteed debentures, investments/deposits with public sector companies (with transitional deeming rules if company ceases to be a public sector company), bonds issued by specified financial corporations or public companies engaged in long-term housing/urban infrastructure finance, immovable property, IDBI deposits, units of specified mutual funds (Schedule VII entries), transfers to Public Account of India, deposits with housing/urban development authorities, equity shares of depositories, specified investments by recognised stock exchanges, investments by payment system entities in specified companies, incubator/incubatee investments, shares of National Skill Development Corporation, debt instruments of RBI-registered infrastructure finance companies, Sovereign Gold Bonds ("Stock Certificate" definition reference), units of Powergrid Infrastructure Investment Trust, shares in a public sector company, historical corpus exceptions (assets forming corpus as at specified historical dates), accretions by bonus shares, debentures acquired before specified historical dates, voluntary contributions maintained as specified tangible assets, short-term holding exception for non-specified assets, and funds representing business profits under specified conditions.

      Interpretation

      The schedule is primarily a closed list of permissible forms; interpretive principle implied: only these listed forms (and those falling within the enumerated transitional/historical carve-outs) qualify as compliant with section 350 requirements. The definitions provided constrain certain terms (for example, "long-term finance" defined by a five-year minimum repayment term, "Immovable property" excluding most machinery/plant). Legislative intent as indicated by the text: to allow a mix of conservative, government-backed, regulated financial instruments and specified sectoral investments while controlling diversion into unregulated assets; to preserve historical corpus exceptions; and to permit certain strategic sectoral investments (e.g., incubators, digital payments infrastructure, infrastructure finance).

      Exceptions/Provisos

      The schedule includes multiple temporal and condition-based exceptions: (a) investments in public sector company shares remain covered for three years after the company ceases to be a public sector company; (b) other deposit/investment in such company remains covered until repayable; (c) assets not specified in clauses (1)-(30) are permitted only if not held beyond one year from the end of the tax year in which acquired (Document 1 wording differs slightly-see differences table); (d) corpus preservation exceptions for assets held on 1 June 1973 and 1 June 1998; (e) certain assets acquired before 1 March 1983; (f) business profits may be retained only if separate books are maintained where other income exists.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A registered non-profit purchases Central Government savings certificates and deposits surplus funds in a scheduled bank: these are permitted under clauses (1) and (3).
      • Example 2: A trust acquires equity shares of a public sector company that later becomes disinvested and ceases to qualify as a public sector company; the trust's shareholding is deemed to remain a permitted investment for three years from the date of change (clause (7)(a)).
      • Example 3: A charitable institution receives a painting as a voluntary contribution and maintains it as part of corpus pending a Board notification: clause (30)/(32) allows voluntary contributions maintained in forms such as furniture or jewellery if specified by Board notification. (Note: reliance on Board notification is required.)

      Interplay

      The schedule cross-references: Government Savings Certificates Act, 1959; Depositories Act, 1996; Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956; Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992; Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007; Companies Act, 2013; Industrial Development Bank of India Act, 1964; Schedule VII (mutual fund schemes); Sovereign Gold Bonds Scheme notification G.S.R. 827(E) dated 30 October 2015; and section 32(e) (as corrected). Interaction with these statutes and notifications determines eligibility/qualification of instruments and entities named. Specific practical interpretive issues: Not stated in the document (e.g., guidance on valuation, treatment of hybrid instruments, or applicable timelines for Board notifications).

      Differences between Document 1 (Schedule-XVI of Income-tax Act, 2025) and Document 2 (Schedule-XVI of Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version)

      FeatureDocument 1 (Act)Document 2 (Bill - Old)Practical Impact
      Title/Scope descriptionReads "FORMS OR MODES OF INVESTMENT OR DEPOSITS BY A REGISTERED NON PROFIT ORGANISATION".Reads "FORMS OR MODES OF INVESTMENT OR DEPOSITS BY A CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST OR INSTITUTION".Potential drafting consistency/coverage difference: Act version uses broader term "registered non profit organisation" while Bill refers to "charitable or religious trust or institution". Practical effect depends on statutory definition of "registered non profit organisation" vs. "charitable or religious trust or institution" elsewhere - Not stated in the document.
      Numbering and orderingLists items (1)-(32) with definitions at paragraph 2 (a)-(f).Lists items (1)-(32) then includes clause (33) as the definitions block; textual wording slightly varies (e.g., references to "herein referred to" vs "hereafter referred to").Primarily editorial; no substantive change to listed permissible modes is apparent. Practical impact: negligible on permitted modes; clarity/interpretation possibly affected by drafting differences but core content substantially same.
      Specific clause differences (examples)Includes item (30) "voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form of jewellery, furniture or any other article as the Board may, by notification specify" as clause (30) and item (31) concerning assets not in clauses (1)-(30) held up to one year from end of tax year.Order differs: item (32) in Document 2 is the "voluntary contributions..." clause and item (30) in Document 2 refers to assets not being investments held after expiry of one year from end of tax year. Also Document 2 contains minor textual corrections (notes indicating correction of "section 32 (1)(e)" to "section 32 (e)").These are drafting/numbering and editorial corrections. Practical impact: none substantive, but numbering differences require caution when citing specific sub-paragraph numbers; reference to section 32(e) correction clarifies intended cross-reference.
      Definitions block placement and labellingDefinitions under "2. Interpretation" enumerated (a)-(f).Definitions included at the end as "(33) In this schedule,- (a) ... (f) ..." with slightly different heading style.No substantive difference in definitions themselves. Practical impact limited to citation conventions within drafting-users must ensure referencing correct clause numbering for each version.
      Minor wording variantsUses phrasing such as "herein referred to as investor" and "herein referred to as investee".Uses "hereafter referred to as investor" and "hereafter referred to as investee"; contains textual spacing and punctuation variations and an explicit errata note about corrections.Editorial only. Practical impact: none on legal substance, but the errata notes in Document 2 improve textual accuracy.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Trustees and non-profit administrators must ensure corpus monies are invested only in the enumerated modes or within the short-term holding exception; reliance on non-specified investments beyond the one-year grace risks non-compliance with section 350 conditions. Not stated in the document: procedural sanctions or consequences for non-compliance.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The text implies need for records evidencing nature of instruments (e.g., government certificates, bank deposits, share certificates, notifications of permitted Board-specified tangible assets), dates of acquisition to apply short-term holding rule and historical corpus cut-off dates, and documentation of separate books of accounts where business profits and other income co-exist.

      Key Takeaways

      • SCHEDULE-XVI provides a closed/enumerated list of permitted investment/deposit modes for monies u/s 350, privileging government-backed and regulated instruments and certain sectoral investments.
      • Both documents substantially list the same modes; differences are largely editorial, numbering and minor wording variations, and a title wording variance (registered non-profit organisation vs. charitable or religious trust/institution).
      • Transitional exceptions (public sector company treatment, historical corpus dates, pre-1983 debentures) preserve earlier holdings and prevent retrospective disallowance of legacy corpus assets.
      • Short-term holding exception permits non-specified assets to be held only up to one year from the end of the tax year in which acquired (wording differs slightly between versions; practitioners should confirm the authoritative version before citation).
      • Definitions such as "long-term finance" (five-year minimum) and "Immovable property" (excluding most machinery/plant) narrow the scope of qualifying instruments.
      • Practical compliance requires careful record-keeping, attention to cross-references (e.g., section 32(e), statutory definitions), and monitoring of statutory/Board notifications referenced for certain asset categories.
      • Errata in the Bill (corrections from "section 32(1)(e)" to "section 32(e)") and minor drafting differences mean practitioners should use the enacted/official Gazette text for authoritative citation.

      Full Text:

      SCHEDULE XVI - PERMITTED MODES OF INVESTMENT OR DEPOSITS

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax
      Next ➔