Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
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
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. 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
    Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS to the Government
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Landmark Judgment on Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS ...
    A Case of Coerced Input Tax Credit Reversal - GST recovery during search and seizure proceedings.
    Manner of compliance of conditions of pre-deposit - Debit of amount from electronic credit ledger (E...
    The need for clarity and concrete reasons in the cancellation of GST registrations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of reopening of assessment - need for a direct link between the portal's information and th...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Application of provisions of section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional release of imported goods (apples) - The dispute centers on the valuation of the import...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Applicability of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of expenses - need for tax authorities to have a practical understanding of the nature ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of the assessee's business expenditure claims related to the purchase of sugarcane from...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Additions made u/s 69 and Section 56 in the absence of direct incriminating evidence linking the ass...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Whether penalty is to be imposed when the appellant has accepted the classification and paid the ent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Liability for payment of customs duty on sale of excess liquor from the duty-free shop
    Case LawsCustoms
    Demand of customs duty beyond normal period of limitation on the ground of change in classification ...
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Stringent approach towards ensuring compliance with auditing standards - importance of auditors' res...
    Whether the appellant's claim can be classified as a Financial Debt or Operational Debt under the In...
    Scope of Approval of resolution plan - Allegations of undervaluation of the Corporate Debtor's asset...
    Denial of Input Tax Credit since the GST registration of the Supplier of Goods has been Cancelled wi...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a vested right or concession - Can government impose conditions or restric...
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    TDS credit entitlement affirmed: deductee entitled to credit despite deductor's non-deposit, preventing indirect recovery.
    Credit for tax deducted at source on interest payments is to be treated as tax paid on the deductee's behalf and does not depend on the deductor's remittance; statutory protections against indirect recovery prevent the revenue from seeking the same tax from the deductee when the deductor fails to deposit the deducted amount, and the deposit requirement in the applicable provisions does not negate the deductee's entitlement to such credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax credit for TDS: deductee entitled to credit even if deductor failed to deposit the retained tax with government.
    The Court treats amounts retained by a deductor as remaining tax and concludes the statutory credit mechanism for tax deducted at source does not condition a deductee's entitlement on the deductor having deposited the retained amount with the government, thereby barring indirect recovery or adjustment against the deductee where tax has been deducted at source.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Coercive tax collection prohibited; forced reversal of input tax credit during search deemed impermissible, with investigatory remedies preserved.
    Dispute involved a search under Section 67 and an alleged coerced reversal of Input Tax Credit from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger for supplies from a supplier with retrospectively cancelled registration; the court found such coercive recovery during search impermissible and directed restoration of the ITC while preserving the department's power to investigate and, if ineligible or fraudulent ITC is found, pass appropriate protective orders.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-deposit payment method: Electronic credit ledger debit does not satisfy pre-deposit; cash ledger payment required for appeals.
    Pre-deposit for appeals under the CGST/BGST regime must be paid from the cash ledger; debit from the electronic credit ledger does not satisfy the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A revenue circular restricting ECRL use to certain output tax payments and excluding reverse charge, interest, penalties, fees, and similar amounts supports that ECRL cannot be used for pre-deposit. The court emphasized the statutory payment scheme and strict appeal filing timelines, rejecting arguments that ECRL debit could substitute for cash ledger payment.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Requirement of clear reasons in GST cancellation: retrospective deregistration must be reasoned and consider input tax credit effects.
    Cancellation of GST registration must be supported by clear reasons and concrete factual findings in show cause notices and cancellation orders; labels that a registration is "liable to be cancelled" without specifying dues or factual basis constitute mechanical action. Retrospective cancellation cannot be applied routinely; authorities must follow statutory procedure, assess causes for non-filing, consider exceptional disruptions to business operations, and account for the impact on input tax credit before fixing an effective date of cancellation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use of portal data: digital information needs a direct evidential link before reopening income tax assessments.
    Reopening assessments requires a direct evidential link between portal-derived information and the income alleged to have escaped assessment; portal data alone is insufficient without documentary support for transactions or gifts, and a show cause notice must provide adequate particulars and reflect proper consideration of the taxpayer's response before reassessment proceeds.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Non retrospective application of punitive benami provisions affirmed, limiting enforcement to post amendment transactions.
    Application of Section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 concerns whether punitive provisions enacted in 2016 apply to transactions predating the amendment. The Appellate Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent that such punitive provisions must be applied prospectively, and the High Court emphasized adherence to that interpretation while allowing parties to pursue further remedies pending the Supreme Court review.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of perishable imports allowed pending valuation, subject to provisional assessment and bond to protect revenue interests.
    The dispute concerns provisional release of perishable imported apples amid a valuation contest tied to a stayed minimum import price notification. The instrument requires provisional assessment of the Bill of Entry within a brief timeframe and permits conditional provisional release upon the importer furnishing a bond and meeting terms set by customs, thereby reconciling the protection of revenue interests with the practical need to avoid loss to perishable consignments pending final resolution of the notification's applicability.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Prospective application of punitive benami amendment upheld, limiting reach to post-enactment transactions and preserving pre-enactment protections.
    The Madras High Court affirmed that the enhanced punitive provision introduced by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is substantive and applies prospectively; it endorsed the Tribunal's reliance on the Supreme Court's Ganapati Dealcom decision, treated a pending Supreme Court review petition as not displacing that precedent, and disposed of the appeals while allowing further proceedings consistent with prospectivity and prior constitutional findings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Disallowance of expenses must rest on specific documentation defects, not on blanket percentage adjustments.
    Disallowance of business expenses on a summary or estimate basis requires specific, pointed deficiencies and cannot rest on generalized conclusions about excessiveness; in businesses with routine small transactions, tax authorities must examine the nature of operations and identify particular defects in documentation before applying blanket percentage disallowances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Statutory Minimum Price interpretation: excess cane payments treated as appropriation of profits, not deductible business expense.
    The core issue is whether payments for sugarcane in excess of the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) are deductible business expenditures or constitute an appropriation of profits. The Assessing Officer relied on standard accounting practice requiring provisions for liabilities at year end and treated post closing excess payments as distributions of operational surplus. The appellate view upheld that cooperative status does not alter the tax analysis and that payments beyond the SMP do not qualify as allowable business expenses absent proper provisioning within the accounting period.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Direct incriminating evidence requirement: third party search materials alone cannot sustain unexplained investment additions.
    Additions alleged as unexplained investments and undisclosed interest income based on third party search materials require a demonstrable direct nexus between those seized records and the assessee; absent such direct incriminating evidence, reliance on third party statements or documents is insufficient. Procedural safeguards and transactional indicia-such as cross examination opportunities, banking records, documentary support, and TDS-reduce the probative value of seized material when direct linkage is lacking.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under Section 114A: no justification where importer accepted correct classification and paid differential duty before notice.
    Issue: imposition of a penalty for alleged suppression when the importer accepted correct tariff classification and paid the differential duty with interest before issuance of a show cause notice. The importer attributed the earlier misclassification to an agent error and denied intent to evade duty. The authority observed the accurate product description, admission of correct classification and prompt payment, concluded absence of suppression of facts and determined that the statutory penalty provision was not justified on these facts.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Liability under Section 72: duty rests with duty-free shop licence-holder when trade facility conditions are breached.
    Duty arises where a duty-free shop licence-holder breaches voucher and recordkeeping conditions under the trade facility; the licence-holder bears responsibility for payment of duty and interest when procedural requirements are violated, while penalty depends on culpability and may be disallowed where no intent to evade duty is established and customs were aware of the transactions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation in customs demands inapplicable where no suppression, limiting reassessment for CVD on undeclared MRP entries.
    Reassessment and CVD demand arose from a post-clearance change in classification and retrospective reliance on MRP for past entries; the tribunal held that items described were essential refrigeration parts rather than accessories, that MRP-based reassessment requires clear factual basis, and that the Extended Period of Limitation is inapplicable where no suppression is established, although penalty issues may still be considered where omissions occur.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Auditor responsibility reinforced: regulatory findings against audit failures stress strict adherence to auditing standards and sanctions.
    NFRA found a statutory auditor guilty of professional misconduct for failures to comply with Standards on Auditing, including inadequate procedures to verify revenue, lack of physical inventory verification, insufficient going concern assessment, deficient materiality application, and inadequate communication with Those Charged with Governance, and applied regulatory sanctions to reinforce auditor responsibilities in preserving financial reporting integrity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Operational debt classification confirmed for supplier's claim based on the transaction's nature under the insolvency framework.
    Whether a claim from a supply arrangement is a Financial Debt or an Operational Debt depends on the transaction's substantive character. The tribunal examined contractual terms-penalties for non-delivery, interest, and security cheques-and applied precedents on the financial-versus-operational distinction. It characterised the supplier's claim, filed under Section 9, as arising from the supply of goods and therefore as an operational debt, sustaining the Resolution Professional's and Adjudicating Authority's classification.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial wisdom of committee of creditors governs resolution plan approval, limiting valuation and standing challenges by promoters.
    Exclusion of the creditor was non irregular as no claim was filed; undervaluation allegations were rejected since opportunities to raise them during the CIRP were not used; the resolution plan satisfied Committee approval requirements and reflected the Committee's commercial wisdom; and a suspended director/promoter lacked standing to challenge the approved plan, underscoring limited judicial interference post approval.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit denial over supplier deregistration; remanded for document verification and fresh adjudication to determine genuineness.
    Denial of Input Tax Credit was challenged where the supplier's registration was retrospectively cancelled; the petitioner paid through bank and the supplier appeared on records at the time. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the appellate authority to reconsider the petitioner's documentary evidence, hold a hearing, and pass a reasoned order verifying genuineness and timing of transactions; if purchases are genuine and occurred prior to cancellation, ITC is to be considered per precedent.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit as legislative concession: entitlement subject to statutory conditions, but retrospective deprivation of vested accruals is vulnerable.
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a legislative concession, not a vested right, so the legislature may lawfully prescribe eligibility conditions and procedural limits which taxpayers must strictly satisfy; however, retrospective amendments that destroy or diminish an already accrued entitlement are susceptible to challenge and have been treated as impermissible when they impair rights that vested before the amendment.

    TMI Notes

    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters

      Rationalisation of the provisions of Charitable Trust and Institutions

      1 February, 2023

      Contents
      Plus +
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Union Budget 2023-24 + FINANCE Bill, 2023

      Rationalisation of the provisions of Charitable Trust and Institutions

      1. Background

      1.1 Income of any fund or institution or trust or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or subclause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act or any trust or institution registered u/s 12AA or 12AB of the Act is exempt subject to the fulfilment of the conditions provided under various sections. The exemption to these trusts or institutions is available under the two regimes-

      (i) Regime for any fund or institution or trust or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution referred to in subclause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act (hereinafter referred to as trust or institution under first regime); and

      (ii) Regime for the trusts registered under section 12AA/12AB of the Act (hereinafter referred to as trust or institution under the second regime).

      1.2 Section 12A of the Act, inter alia, provides for procedure to make application for the registration of the trust or institution to claim exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. Section 12AB of the Act is the new section which comes into effect from the 1st April, 2021.

      2. Depositing back of corpus and repayment of loans or borrowings

      2.1 Under the existing provisions of the Act, corpus donations received by trusts and institutions under both regimes are exempt as follows:

      a) Explanation 1 to the third proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act provides that income of the funds or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution, shall not include income in the form of voluntary contributions made with a specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus subject to the condition that such voluntary contributions are invested or deposited in one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11 of the Act maintained specifically for such corpus.

      b) Clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Act provides that voluntary contributions made with a specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus of the trust or institution shall not be included in the total income of the trust or institution subject to the condition that such voluntary contributions are invested or deposited in one or more of the forms or modes specified in subsection (5) of section 11 of the Act maintained specifically for such corpus.

      c) Application out of corpus shall not be considered as application for charitable or religious purposes for the purposes of third proviso of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act and clauses (a) and (b) of section 11 of the Act. However, when it is invested or deposited back, into one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11 of the Act maintained specifically for such corpus, from the income of the previous year, such amount shall be allowed as application in the previous year in which it is deposited back to corpus to the extent of such deposit or investment.

      d) Application from loans and borrowings shall not be considered as application for charitable or religious purposes for the purposes of third proviso of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act and clauses (a) and (b) of section 11 of the Act. However, when loan or borrowing is repaid from the income of the previous year, such repayment shall be allowed as application in the previous year in which it is repaid to the extent of such repayment.

      2.2 While implementing the recent changes vide the Finance Act, 2021 to the provisions related to corpus and loan or borrowing, it has come to the notice that application from corpus or loan or borrowings have already been claimed as application prior to 01.04.2021. Hence, allowing such amount to be application again as investment or reposting back in corpus or repayment of loan or borrowing will amount to double deduction.

      2.3 It was also noted that, a trust may invest or deposit back the amount in to corpus or repay the loan after many years of application from the corpus or loan and claim such repayment of loan or investment/depositing back in to corpus as application for charitable or religious purposes. Availability of indefinite period for the investment or depositing back to the corpus or repayment of loan will make the implementation of the provisions quite difficult.

      2.4 Further, it was noted that conditions that are required to be satisfied in the case of application for charitable or religious purposes must also be satisfied while making the application from the corpus or loan or borrowing. These conditions are as follows:

      (i) Such application should not be in the form of corpus donation to another trust [twelfth proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act for the trust or institution under first regime and Explanation 2 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act for the trust or institution under second regime];

      (ii) TDS, if applicable, should be deducted on such application [thirteenth proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act for the trust or institution under first regime and Explanation 3 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act for the trust or institution under second regime];

      (iii) Application whereby payment or aggregate of payments made to a person in a day exceeds Rs 10,000 in other than specified modes (such as cash) is not allowed (thirteenth proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act for the trust or institution under first regime and Explanation 3 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act for the trust or institution under second regime);

      (iv) Carry forward and set off of excess application is not allowed [Explanation 2 to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act for the trust or institution under first regime and Explanation 5 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act for the trust or institution under second regime];

      (v) Application is allowed in the year in which it is actually paid [Explanation 3 to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act for the trust or institution under first regime and Explanation to section 11 of the Act for the trust or institution under second regime];

      (vi) Application should not directly or indirectly benefit any person referred to in sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Act and the income of the trust or institution should not enure any benefit to such person [twenty-first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act for the trust or institution under first regime and clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Act for the trust or institution under second regime];

      (vii) Application should be in India except with the approval of the Board in accordance with the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act.

      2.5 In order to ensure proper implementation of both the exemption regimes, it is proposed to provide that application out of corpus or loans or borrowings before 01.04.2021 should not be allowed as application for charitable or religious purposes when such amount is deposited back or invested in to corpus or when the loan or borrowing is repaid. It is further proposed to provide that if the trust or institution invests or deposits back the amount in to corpus or repays the loan within 5 years of application from the corpus or loan, then such investment/depositing back in to corpus or repayment of loan will be allowed as application for charitable or religious purposes. It is also proposed to provide that where the application from corpus or loan did not satisfy the conditions as stated in paragraph 2.4, the repayment of loan or investment/depositing back in to corpus of such amount will not be treated as application.

      2.6 In view of the above, the following amendments are proposed:

      (i) insert a second proviso to clause (i) of Explanation 2 to the third proviso of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act so as to provide that the provisions of the first proviso shall apply only if there was no violation of the conditions specified in the twelfth, thirteenth and twenty- first proviso to, and Explanation 2 and Explanation 3 of, clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act, at the time the application was made from the corpus;

      (ii) insert third proviso to clause (i) of Explanation 2 to the third proviso of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act so as to provide that the amount invested or deposited back shall not be treated as application for charitable or religious purposes under the first proviso unless such investment or deposit is made within a period of five years from the end of the previous year in which such application was made from corpus;

      (iii) insert a fourth proviso to clause (i) of Explanation 2 to the third proviso of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act to provide that so as to provide that nothing contained in the first proviso shall apply where application from corpus is made on or before the 31st day of March, 2021;

      (iv) insert a second proviso to clause (ii) of Explanation 2 to the third proviso of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act so as to provide that the provisions of the first proviso shall apply only if there was no violation of the conditions specified in the twelfth, thirteenth and twenty- first proviso to, and Explanation 2 and Explanation 3 of, clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act, at the time the application was made from loan or borrowing;

      (v) insert a third proviso to clause (ii) of Explanation 2 to the third proviso of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act to provide that the amount repaid shall not be treated as application for charitable or religious purposes under the first proviso, unless such repayment is made within a period of five years from the end of the previous year in which such application was made from loan or borrowing;

      (vi) insert a fourth proviso to clause (ii) of Explanation 2 to the third proviso of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act to provide that nothing contained in the first proviso shall apply where application, from any loan or borrowing is made on or before the thirty first day of March, 2021;

      (vii) insert a second proviso to clause (i) of Explanation 4 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act so as to provide that the provisions of the first proviso shall apply only if there was no violation of the conditions, specified in clause (c) of, and Explanations 2, 3 and 5 of, sub-section (1) and Explanation to section 11 of the Act and clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Act, at the time the application was made from the corpus;

      (viii) insert a third proviso to clause (i) of Explanation 4 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act so as to provide that the amount invested or deposited back shall not be treated as application for charitable or religious purposes under the first proviso unless such investment or deposit is made within a period of five years from the end of the previous year in which such application was made from corpus;

      (ix) insert a fourth proviso to clause (i) of Explanation 4 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act so as to provide that nothing contained in the first proviso shall apply where application from corpus is made on or before the 31st day of March, 2021;

      (x) insert a second proviso to clause (ii) of Explanation 4 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act so as to provide that the provisions of the first proviso shall apply only if there was no violation of the conditions, specified in clause (c) of, and Explanations 2, 3 and 5 of, sub-section (1) and Explanation to section 11 of the Act or clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Act, at the time the application was made from loan or borrowing;

      (xi) insert a third proviso to clause (ii) of Explanation 4 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act so as to provide that the amount repaid shall not be treated as application for charitable or religious purposes under the first proviso unless such repayment is made within a period of five years from the end of the previous year during which such application was made form loan or borrowing;

      (xii) insert a fourth proviso to clause (ii) of Explanation 4 to sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act so as to provide that nothing contained in the first proviso shall apply where application from any loan or borrowing is made on or before the thirty first day of March, 2021.

      2.7 These amendments will take effect from 1st April, 2023 and will accordingly apply to the assessment year 2023-24 and subsequent assessment years.

      [clauses 5 & 7]

       


      Full Text:

      Union Budget 2023-24 + FINANCE Bill, 2023

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax