New Income Tax Bill gets Lok Sabha nod
ADVERTISEMENT The Income Tax (NO.2) Bill, which will replace the Income Tax Act, 1961 from the next financial year, was introduced by Union finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman and passed in the Lok Sabha amid din without a debate. It will now go to Rajya Sabha for its approval. The bill cuts down wordage and chapters by almost half and presents the clauses in simpler and easier to understand language.
It does away with the confusing concepts of assessment year and previous year, replacing them with "tax year".
The original Income Tax Bill, 2025, which was introduced in February, was withdrawn by the minister on Friday and the new bill incorporating "almost all recommendations" of the select committee, headed by parliamentarian Baijayant Panda, which had scrutinised the original bill, was introduced.The bill has maintained status quo on loss carry forward provisions, exempted non-profit organisations from taxing anonymous donations received by purely religious trusts and tweaked the definition of MSMEs (micro, small and medium enterprises) in alignment with the MSME Act, which were part of the recommendations of the panel.
ADVERTISEMENT It has also reintroduced deductions in respect of certain inter-corporate dividends for companies opting for concessional rate of taxes in line with the provisions of the existing Income-tax Act, 1961 and nil tax collected at source on Liberalised Remittance Scheme remittances for education purposes financed by any financial institutions.The bill has added the term 'profession' alongside 'business' under electronic payment rules, which means professionals with income of more than ₹50 crore annually must use prescribed electronic modes of payment.
ADVERTISEMENT The bill has also clearly defined deductions for commuted pension and gratuity received by family members.Experts said some of the pain points have been removed.
ADVERTISEMENT "The revised Income-tax Bill, 2025 demonstrates the government's receptiveness to parliamentary recommendations, incorporating targeted amendments to enhance clarity, ease of compliance and consistency with existing legislation," said Sandeep Jhunjhunwala, partner, Nangia Andersen LLP.
"To give a few examples, the provisions of levying alternate minimum tax on LLPs has been done away with, the rigours placed on charitable trust have been removed, the provisions of transfer pricing and the definition of 'associated enterprise' to whom these provisions apply, have been relaxed," said Dinesh Kanabar, CEO, Dhruva Advisors.
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Wire
22 minutes ago
- The Wire
'An Arbitrary and Brute Exercise of Power': PUCL Slams J&K Book Ban
The PUCL said that Section 152 of the BNS which is the so called decolonial law, strikingly goes even further than Section 124-A (sedition) of the IPC in its criminalisation of speech. New Delhi: The People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has expressed outrage over the decision of the Jammu and Kashmir Government's home department headed by lieutenant governor Manoj Sinha to forfeit 25 book titles in an omnibus order under Section 98 of the BNSS, for 'promoting secessionism' and 'inciting violence against [the] Indian state' in the Union territory. In a statement issued by its national president Kavita Srivastava and general secretary V. Suresh, the PUCL termed the notification 'an arbitrary and brute exercise of power by the state uncanalised by the discipline of the Constitution'. 'What the state is seeking to tell the citizens is that any opinion which is not the opinion of the state cannot be tolerated. This is a form of totalitarian thinking which is unacceptable in a constitutional democracy,' said the PUCL statement. 'By the mass forfeiting of books, the Jammu and Kashmir government is utilising a colonial, British-era law (Section 95 of the colonial, British era, CrPC finds its Bharatiya or so-called decolonial avatar, as Section 98 of the BNSS) which was designed to suppress demands for Indian independence. This law has been used by the British to ban canonical texts like Hind Swaraj by Mahatma Gandhi,' the statement added. PUCL said that among the 25 books forfeited are books by Anuradha Bhasin, Sumantra Bose, Tariq Ali, A.G. Noorani, Arundhati Roy, Ather Zia and a host of others, books that give a flavour of the realms traversed covering history, memory, poetry and politics. 'These books represent a vibrant intellectual culture of thinking and writing about Kashmir. These viewpoints may be deemed unacceptable by the Indian establishment, but they are viewpoints which are protected speech under the Indian Constitution. The forfeiture notice is an attempt at stifling collective memory and preventing thought in Kashmir,' said the PUCL statement. 'By clamping down on these books, the attempt to stifle the very heart of intellectual life: which is to seek knowledge and form opinion by gathering thought from all, including contrarian, sources,' it added. 'The forfeiture notification is illegal and unconstitutional' The PUCL said that the Jammu and Kashmir government must appreciate that there may be viewpoints they disagree with, but a constitutional democracy is based on the fact that dissenting opinions exist and should be respected. 'What is not apparent from a reading of the Government notification is a reasoning as to the grounds for forfeiture. What the notification has is a bald, bare and sweeping assertion with no reference to how any of the twenty-five books have contributed to 'radicalisation of youth in J&K include distortion of historical facts, glorification of terrorists, vilification of security forces, religious radicalisation, promotion of alienation, pathway to violence and terrorism etc,'' said the PUCL statement. 'When there is an omnibus forfeiture order of 25 books, without any specific reference to the content of any of the books, prima facie it appears that the exercise of the power of forfeiture is not a justified exercise of power under Section 98 of the BNSS and will not come within the reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) of the Constitution,' it added. The PUCL said that Section 152 of the BNS which is the so called decolonial law, strikingly goes even further than Section 124-A (sedition) of the IPC in its criminalisation of speech. It demanded an immediate withdrawal of the forfeiture notice of 25 books by the Jammu and Kashmir government and also called for the repealing of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Hindustan Times
22 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Vote theft': BJP's lone Kerala seat in focus, Congress flags discrepancies in Thrissur voter list
Amid the vote theft row, Congress MP KC Venugopal on Tuesday raised concerns over the alleged discrepancies in the voters' list, especially in Kerala's Thrissur constituency. BJP's Suresh Gopi won from the Thrissur seat with a margin of over 70,000 votes, defeating Congress's K Muraleedharan and CPI's V S Sunilkumar.(X/@TheSureshGopi) 'Many cases are coming out from Thrissur also... BJP has only one seat in Kerala, that too in Thrissur... After Rahul Gandhi's press conference, people are raising discrepancies all over India,' the Congress MP was quoted as saying by ANI. "EC must address this concern. Instead of addressing it, they are only targeting Rahul Gandhi and the opposition parties," he added further. BJP's Suresh Gopi won from the Thrissur seat with a margin of over 70,000 votes, defeating Congress's K Muraleedharan and CPI's V S Sunilkumar. Congress leader VD Satheesan has also flagged the discrepancies in the voter list for the Thrissur constituency. Also Read | Fainting, jumping barricades & detention: What went down at INDIA bloc's protest march "There were multiple voters with the same name, about 60 voters linked to a single-room house, and several irregularities like father's names being listed only as English initials, or house numbers marked as '0'," he said. The Congress leader further flagged discrepancies in the newly enrolled voters' data, where some individuals listed as 18 years old were actually between 70 to 80 years old. 'Such large-scale electoral fraud has taken place across the country, including in the Maharashtra Assembly elections and the last Parliamentary elections. It is now being repeated in Bihar. PM Narendra Modi and his associates are in power by sabotaging free and fair elections, something seen only in authoritarian regimes, not in true democracies. They are not even fit to remain in power,' Satheesan was quoted as saying by news agency ANI. Echoing the Congress' claims, the CPI(M) has also raised similar concerns for the Thrissur seat, which is the only seat BJP won during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Kerala woman claims fake voters registered to her house A woman in Kerala has claimed that nine 'fake' voters were registered against her address in Thrissur. As per an India Today report, the woman has claimed that she was the only person in her household who votes in Thrissur city. Her family, which includes four adults and two children, are registered to Poochinipadam village. Speaking to reporters, she learnt of the nine new names when she was approached for verification. 'We don't know any of them [nine additional names]. We have been living here for four years. It's not right to add names to our address without our consent," she told India Today, adding that she had filed a complaint with the district collector. Opposition claims vote theft occurred during 2024 Lok Sabha elections On August 7, Congress MP and Lok Sabha leader of opposition Rahul Gandhi claimed that a total of 1,00,250 "fake votes" were created in the Mahadevapura Assembly segment in the Bangalore Central Lok Sabha constituency in Karnataka to ensure a win for the Bharatiya Janata Party. Also Read | 'Declare under oath...': On Rahul Gandhi's 'vote chori' charge, EC's counter The Congress MP further alleged that a "collusion" had happened between the Election Commission of India and the BJP, which resulted in Narendra Modi's third term as Prime Minister of India. "Narendra Modi became Prime Minister with just a margin of 25 seats... Election Commission is helping BJP destroy the electoral system in India... The Election Commission is not giving us the data because of what we did in Mahadevpur (Karnataka Assembly constituency); if we do it in other Lok Sabha seats, then the truth about our democracy will come out. This is the evidence, criminal evidence (pointing to the physical voter list)," said Gandhi. The Leader of Opposition has further alleged that Election Commission is "destroying evidence.'
Time of India
22 minutes ago
- Time of India
Will central government employees get arrears of 18 months of DA frozen during Covid 19? Here's what finance ministry says
During COVID-19, the central government froze three dearness allowance instalments. This decision aimed to ease pressure on public finances amid economic disruption. Member of Parliament Anand Bhadauria questioned the DA arrears. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What is Dearness Allowance? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The time by which the government would release the arrears of 18 months DA/DR? The central government froze three instalments of dearness allowance (DA) and dearness relief (DR) during the COVID-19 pandemic, citing severe economic disruption and the need to ease pressure on public finances. Member of Parliament Anand Bhadauria raised questions regarding the DA arrears for central government employees during COVID-19, to which the government responded with its official stance in Lok Sabha on August 11, Allowance (DA) is a cost-of-living adjustment paid by the government to its employees and pensioners to help offset the impact of read: Last DA hike of 3% or 4% under 7th CPC in July 2025? Central government employees can get this much increase in dearness allowance Dearness Relief (DR) is an allowance paid to government pensioners to help them cope with rising prices, similar to Dearness Allowance (DA) for working Wealth Online breaks down the government's official response to below key government responded in Parliament: The decision to freeze three instalments of Dearness Allowance (DA) / Dearness Relief (DR) to Central Government employees / pensioners due from January 1, 2020, July 1, 2020 & January 1, 2021 was taken in the context of COVID-19, which caused economic disruption, so as to ease pressure on government government responded in Parliament: 'The fiscal deficit of the government of India has narrowed from 9.2 per cent in the Financial Year (FY) 2020-21 to 4.4 per cent in the FY 2025-26 (Budget Estimates).'The economic hit from COVID and extra welfare spending left no room in the budget to pay those delayed DA/DR government responded in Parliament: 'The adverse financial impact of pandemic in 2020 and the financing of welfare measures taken by the Government had a fiscal spill over beyond FY 2020-21. Therefore, arrears of DA/DR were not considered feasible.'
