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
╳
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
    Maximum Marginal Rate and Surcharge for Discretionary Trusts: ITAT Special Bench Clarifies Slab-Base...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Classification of Quicklime under the Customs Tariff: CESTAT Bangalore's Reaffirmation of HSN-Based ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Reassessment Notices Post-Ashish Agarwal and TOLA: Limitation and Sanction u/ss 149 and ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Seizure, Provisional Release and Limitation: Supreme Court on the Interplay of Sections 110(2), 110A...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Prima Facie Adjustments v. Substantive Adjudication: Procedural Boundaries in Return Processing (CPC...
    Case LawsGST
    Survey, Unaccounted Stock (Eye-Estimates) and the Limits of Section 130: Statutory Primacy of Sectio...
    Case LawsGST
    Input Tax Credit Abuse (ITC Fraud) and Judicial Review: Delhi High Court on Natural Justice, RUDs an...
    Case LawsGST
    Writ Jurisdiction and Statutory Appeal in GST Fraud Investigations: A Judicial Re-affirmation
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 11(3) Post-Amendment, Accumulated Income and the Sixth Year: Legal Interpretation, Procedura...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Form No.10B & Section 119(2)(b): Condonation of Delay in Tax Exemption Claims: Principles, Precedent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Regulatory Ambit of Import of Second-Hand Electronic Capital Goods: Classification, Exemption and Pr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 195, DTAAs and Software Licences: A Practical Framework for Withholding Tax
    Case LawsGST
    Provisional Attachment under GST: Draconian Powers, Statutory Time-Bars and the Rule of Law: Interpr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 263 Revisited: Jurisdictional Boundaries Where AO Takes a Plausible View on 80G Claims
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional Release in Customs Law: Balancing Revenue Protection and Commercial Fairness - A Compara...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Conditional Re-export and Revenue Safeguards: Judicially Crafted Remedies in Customs Adjudication
    Case LawsGST
    GST Limitation Regime vs Executive Notifications: Judicial Review of Time-Limit Notifications under ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 11(3) After Finance Act, 2022: Utilization of Accumulated Income - Deemed Income, Vesting an...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    When Can an ITAT Reopen a Decision? Distinguishing Prior Binding Precedent from Subsequent Case-Law
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment and Jurisdiction: Reconciling JAO Roles with NFAC u/ss 144B & 151A (JAO / FAO)
❮
❯
❯❯
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
    Maximum Marginal Rate and Surcharge for Discretionary Trusts: ITAT Special Bench Clarifies Slab-Base...
    Show AI Summary
    Discretionary trusts taxed at maximum marginal rate must have surcharge computed under slab and threshold rules, not automatically at top rate.
    For private discretionary trusts taxed at the maximum marginal rate under sections 164/167B, the term denotes the highest basic slab rate under the Finance Act, but surcharge on that tax must be computed according to the Finance Act's slab- and threshold-based surcharge provisions; if the trust's total income does not cross the statutory surcharge threshold, no surcharge is leviable despite basic tax being at the top slab rate.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Classification of Quicklime under the Customs Tariff: CESTAT Bangalore's Reaffirmation of HSN-Based ...
    Show AI Summary
    Quicklime classification: impure lime falls under specific tariff heading, not high purity calcium oxide, per HSN purity standard.
    The imported material, chemically tested as impure calcium oxide (about 92.2% CaO with mineral impurities), is classifiable under Heading 2522 10 00 as Quicklime. Chapter Note 1 to Chapter 25 must be read contextually and does not disqualify quicklime from Chapter 25 where the tariff text and HSN Explanatory Notes expressly contemplate calcined quicklime. Heading 2825 is confined to chemically pure calcium oxide (approximately 98% CaO) and its residuary sub-heading cannot displace the specific Heading 2522 unless that purity threshold and absence of impurities are met.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Reassessment Notices Post-Ashish Agarwal and TOLA: Limitation and Sanction u/ss 149 and ...
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment notices: surviving-time computation under COVID-era relief and new limitation rules renders late notices time-barred.
    The court held that in transitional reassessment cases the appropriate sanctioning authority is determined by when the original three-year expiry fell within the COVID-era relief window, so approval by the ordinarily specified authority for within-three-year cases suffices; limitation is governed by a two-step surviving-time computation measured from the original notice as of the relief-window terminal date, excluding stayed periods and the time allowed to reply, and any later notice issued beyond that surviving time is time-barred under the substituted limitation regime read with the time-relief statute and the legal-fiction continuity.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Seizure, Provisional Release and Limitation: Supreme Court on the Interplay of Sections 110(2), 110A...
    Show AI Summary
    Seizure of goods: six month statutory limit for issuing show cause notice is mandatory despite provisional release.
    The six month limit in Section 110(2) for issuing a show cause notice after seizure under Section 110(1) is mandatory; only a single six month extension under the first proviso is permissible. Provisional release under Section 110A does not suspend, extend or neutralise that time bar. The 2018 second proviso making the six month rule inapplicable where provisional release is ordered is a substantive change and does not validate pre amendment seizures prolonged without notice.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Prima Facie Adjustments v. Substantive Adjudication: Procedural Boundaries in Return Processing (CPC...
    Show AI Summary
    Prima facie adjustments cannot decide debatable legal claims in return processing; contested deductions require scrutiny procedures.
    When a claimed deduction depends on timely deposit of employee welfare contributions and the legal question is debatable or pending higher adjudication, summary processing adjustments cannot be used to resolve the dispute; such matters require scrutiny or reassessment procedures and the validity of any processing-stage action must be judged by the law and facts existing at the time of processing.
    Case LawsGST
    Survey, Unaccounted Stock (Eye-Estimates) and the Limits of Section 130: Statutory Primacy of Sectio...
    Show AI Summary
    Survey discovered unaccounted stock must be assessed under sections 35(6) and 73/74, not via section 130.
    Tax liability for unaccounted goods found in a survey must be determined under section 35(6) read with sections 73/74 of the GST Act; section 130 cannot be used to quantify tax or levy penalty in such cases. The statutory cross reference to sections 73/74 requires adherence to their procedural safeguards, and quantification based solely on eye estimates during survey is insufficient without proper weighment or verification.
    Case LawsGST
    Input Tax Credit Abuse (ITC Fraud) and Judicial Review: Delhi High Court on Natural Justice, RUDs an...
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit fraud: writ relief limited where appeals exist; hearings and raw RUDs generally suffice absent prejudice.
    The High Court held that writ jurisdiction must be exercised with restraint in complex ITC fraud matters appealable under Section 107; at least one personal hearing and provision of RUDs as collected by the Department generally suffice absent demonstrable prejudice; detailed allocation of penal liability under Sections 73/74/75(13)/122 requires adjudicatory or appellate factfinding and cannot be resolved in writ proceedings.
    Case LawsGST
    Writ Jurisdiction and Statutory Appeal in GST Fraud Investigations: A Judicial Re-affirmation
    Show AI Summary
    Writ jurisdiction limited where statutory appeal exists for fact intensive GST fraud investigations; appellate forum preferred for evidentiary disputes.
    The High Court reaffirmed that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is generally inappropriate where a statutory appeal exists for fact intensive GST investigations alleging fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit through fake invoices. Courts should confine review to jurisdictional defects or breaches of natural justice; detailed evidentiary disputes involving voluminous Relied Upon Documents, recorded statements and transaction chains are better resolved by the specialised appellate forum, which should hear appeals on merits and avoid dismissing on limitation grounds where appropriate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 11(3) Post-Amendment, Accumulated Income and the Sixth Year: Legal Interpretation, Procedura...
    Show AI Summary
    Prospectivity of tax amendments: changes to accumulation rules apply from their effective date, not to prior accruals.
    Interpretation of section 11(3) concludes that, under the pre-amendment text, accumulated charitable funds could be applied in the year immediately following the five-year accumulation period; the 2022/2023 amendment removing that year was treated as prospective under the presumption against retrospective tax imposition. Separately, corrections by the Centralised Processing Centre under section 143(1) are confined to mechanistic errors and should not resolve debatable substantive questions of statutory interpretation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Form No.10B & Section 119(2)(b): Condonation of Delay in Tax Exemption Claims: Principles, Precedent...
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay in tax exemption claims should favor substantive rights over mere technical filing defects when bona fide.
    Equitable application of the Condonation Power requires authorities to admit late Form No.10B filings when short delays or credible explanations would otherwise strip claimants of substantive exemption rights; procedural defects such as digital-signature technicalities must be tested against documentary e-filing evidence and substantial compliance, while administrative safeguards permit subsequent verification of the audit report.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Regulatory Ambit of Import of Second-Hand Electronic Capital Goods: Classification, Exemption and Pr...
    Show AI Summary
    Imported second hand MFDs meeting HSE technical criteria can be exempt from BIS registration and obtain conditional provisional release.
    Where importers produce prima facie evidence that imported second hand MFDs meet the Highly Specialized Equipment (HSE) criteria (limited units per model and physical thresholds such as weight >80 kg), those devices are exempt from compulsory BIS registration under the CRO and fall within the FTP residuary category for second hand capital goods; accordingly, provisional release may be granted on conditions (bond/guarantee and document verification) without prejudice to final adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 195, DTAAs and Software Licences: A Practical Framework for Withholding Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty characterisation for software determines withholding-non exclusive copies/licenses generally not subject to TDS unless income is chargeable.
    Payments for off the shelf/shrink wrapped software or hardware embedded software that constitute a resale of a copyrighted article or a grant of a non exclusive, restricted licence for internal use do not ordinarily constitute royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or typical DTAA provisions; withholding under section 195 arises only where the non resident's receipts are chargeable to tax in India (e.g., due to a PE or transfer of substantive copyright rights), and retrospective domestic amendments cannot be used to impose past withholding obligations on payors who lacked notice of the expanded definition.
    Case LawsGST
    Provisional Attachment under GST: Draconian Powers, Statutory Time-Bars and the Rule of Law: Interpr...
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional attachment limits: fixed statutory expiry prevents re-issuance of lapsed attachment orders on same property.
    A provisional attachment under the CGST scheme automatically ceases on expiry of the statutory time limit; once it has lapsed by operation of law, tax authorities have no power to re issue or renew a fresh provisional attachment over the same property on substantially the same grounds, and any such fresh order is void. Procedural rules or executive instructions cannot be used to circumvent this statutory safeguard and must be aligned with the primary legislation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 263 Revisited: Jurisdictional Boundaries Where AO Takes a Plausible View on 80G Claims
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional jurisdiction cannot overturn a plausible assessment on charitable deductions where donation conditions are met.
    Tribunals held that Explanation 2 limiting CSR expenditure as a business deduction operates within the business income chapter and does not ipso facto bar claims under the donations regime; specific statutory exceptions indicate Parliament's choice to restrict only certain items. A mandatory CSR outlay does not automatically negate donation character where there is no material return, provided donee approval and documentary evidence are established. On revisional power, section 263 cannot be invoked to overturn an assessing officer's tenable, precedent backed view where enquiries were made; revision is justified only if the AO's conclusion is legally untenable or there was no inquiry.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional Release in Customs Law: Balancing Revenue Protection and Commercial Fairness - A Compara...
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of seized imports permitted subject to proportionate security, favouring bonds over bank guarantees before adjudication.
    Provisional release under Section 110 is permitted subject to proportionate protections: payment of duties as self-assessed; payment of a substantive portion (commonly fifty percent) of any departmental differential; and execution of enforceable bonds for the balance. Bank guarantees or cash security for speculative fines prior to adjudication are often disproportionate and may be replaced by bonds, though deliberate mis-declaration, concealment or prohibited imports justify stricter protective measures.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Conditional Re-export and Revenue Safeguards: Judicially Crafted Remedies in Customs Adjudication
    Show AI Summary
    Conditional re-export of detained imports permitted when revenue is secured by enforceable financial guarantees and timelines.
    Courts may permit re-export of detained imports where the anticipated departmental remedy is monetary, provided the importer furnishes enforceable financial safeguards-typically a bond quantifying revenue exposure and a bank guarantee for a calibrated portion of the redetermined value-and complies with prescribed timelines; such orders are without prejudice to the Department's right to complete investigations, adjudicate, assess differential duties, and impose penalties.
    Case LawsGST
    GST Limitation Regime vs Executive Notifications: Judicial Review of Time-Limit Notifications under ...
    Show AI Summary
    Force majeure causation in GST limitation: proximate cause and mandatory council recommendation govern valid time limit extensions.
    Section 168A empowers executive modification of GST limitation periods but operates as delegated legislation subject to strict construction: valid exercise requires (i) a qualifying force majeure event, (ii) inability to complete prescribed actions, and (iii) proximate causation by that event; GST Council recommendation is a mandatory precondition and GIC substitution or post-facto ratification does not cure statutory defect.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 11(3) After Finance Act, 2022: Utilization of Accumulated Income - Deemed Income, Vesting an...
    Show AI Summary
    Accumulated trust income: Tribunal rulings treat the 2022 amendment as prospective, preserving the prior six year utilisation window.
    Two Tribunal benches held that the Finance Act, 2022 amendment to the accumulation provision is prospective; accumulations made before 1 April 2022 remain governed by the prior law including the additional one year grace, and utilisation within that six year window cannot be taxed for AY 2023 24. The Tribunals relied on the presumption against retrospectivity, the Finance Bill memorandum stating an effective date of 1 April 2023, and fairness doctrines to conclude Parliament did not intend to curtail vested rights retroactively.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    When Can an ITAT Reopen a Decision? Distinguishing Prior Binding Precedent from Subsequent Case-Law
    Show AI Summary
    Tribunal recall power limited: later judicial overruling alone cannot reopen finalized tax orders under review rules.
    The tribunal's power to amend is limited to rectifying a mistake apparent from the record existing at the time of the original order or to taking into account contemporaneous binding precedent not placed before it; a subsequent overruling or clarification by a superior court cannot alone justify recall, in light of the explanatory bar in Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC and related authorities.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment and Jurisdiction: Reconciling JAO Roles with NFAC u/ss 144B & 151A (JAO / FAO)
    Show AI Summary
    Concurrent jurisdiction between JAO and faceless authorities affirmed; JAO may initiate reassessment followed by faceless assessment.
    The faceless scheme and RMS produce information that may be surfaced to the JAO, permitting the JAO to conduct the pre-notice inquiry and form satisfaction to issue a notice initiating reassessment; thereafter records may be transmitted for faceless assessment via automated allocation, embodying a two-stage model that preserves both JAO initiation authority and central faceless assessment.

    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 ➔