{"id":6876,"date":"2020-04-02T12:50:22","date_gmt":"2020-04-02T07:20:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/?p=6876"},"modified":"2020-04-02T12:50:22","modified_gmt":"2020-04-02T07:20:22","slug":"amendments-to-the-finance-bill-2020-analysis-of-key-amendments","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/amendments-to-the-finance-bill-2020-analysis-of-key-amendments\/","title":{"rendered":"Amendments To The Finance Bill, 2020: Analysis Of Key Amendments"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-content\/uploads\/Shashi-Bekal.jpg\" alt=\"Shashi Bekal\" width=\"129\" height=\"150\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-6435\" srcset=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-content\/uploads\/Shashi-Bekal.jpg 129w, https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-content\/uploads\/Shashi-Bekal-100x116.jpg 100w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 129px) 100vw, 129px\" \/><strong>Advocate Shashi Ashok Bekal has conducted a systematic analysis of the numerous important amendments ushered in by the <a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/download-finance-act-2020\/\">Finance Act 2020<\/a>. He has explained in a comprehensive manner the current law, the proposed law, the amendment to the proposed law, and its implications on tax payers and tax man<\/strong> <\/p>\n<p><strong>I. Introduction <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Finance Bill, 2020 <strong><em>(2020)  420 ITR 115 (st) (146)<\/em><\/strong> has been passed by the Parliament with around 50  plus amendments but without any discussion on March 23,2020. This article aims at a deep dive to understand  these amendments as it stands in the <a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/03\/Finance-Act-2020.pdf\">Finance Act, 2020<\/a>; it would be  imperative to understand the current law, the proposed law, the amendment to  the proposed law, and its implications on the tax payers and tax man.  Accordingly, each key amendment will be dealt in the above-mentioned sequence. <\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p><strong>II. Table  of Key Amendments<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1. One-time  option in new concessional tax regime for individuals and HUFs<\/p>\n<p>2. Residency  provisions for Individuals<\/p>\n<p>3. Exemption to certain corpus  donation under section 11 of the Act<\/p>\n<p>4. Exemption  of income of sovereign wealth funds<\/p>\n<p>5. Clarification  on exemption of dividends received during transitional period<\/p>\n<p>6. Taxability  of dividend income in the hands of unit holders of Real Estate Investment Trust  (<strong>REIT<\/strong>)\/Infrastructure Investment Trust (<strong>Invit<\/strong>)<\/p>\n<p>7. Benefit  of inter-corporate dividend deduction <\/p>\n<p>8. Lower  rate of TDS for Royalty for sale, distribution or exhibition of cinematographic  films<\/p>\n<p>9. Non-applicability  of withholding on redemption\/ repurchase made by mutual funds to unit holders<\/p>\n<p>10. Withholding  on Cash withdrawals<\/p>\n<p>11. Withholding  on e-commerce operators<\/p>\n<p>12. Withholding  rate on dividend received by Non-resident Individuals and foreign companies<\/p>\n<p>13. Relaxation  for Tax Collected at Source (<strong>TCS<\/strong>) on Liberalized Remittance Scheme(<strong>LRS<\/strong>)  remittances and import and export of goods<\/p>\n<p>14. Equalisation  Levy on e-commerce transactions<\/p>\n<p><strong>III. Amendments<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The key amendments  as abovementioned are discussed as under:<\/p>\n<p><strong>1. One-time option in new concessional tax regime for  individuals and HUFs [S. 115BAC of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>1.1. The  existing law:<\/strong> As per the existing law, there was  only one tax regime for individuals and HUF. According to the same, the tax  payer was allowed deductions under chapter VI A on their &lsquo;Gross total income&rsquo;  before arriving at &lsquo;Total Income&rsquo;. Subsequently, tax payable was computed basis  3 slabs of tax rates i.e. 5 per cent, 20 per cent and 30 per cent excluding  cess and surcharge.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>1.2. The  proposed law: <\/strong>As per the Finance Bill, 2020  introduced on February 1, 2020, provided an option under section 115BAC of the  Income tax Act, 1961 (<strong>Act<\/strong>) to avail a concessional slab rates by forgoing  certain exemptions &amp; deductions and satisfying certain conditions. The  option to opt for or out of the new regime could only be exercised once for tax  payers earning business income. <strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further,  individuals &amp; HUF who do not have any business income could opt for the  concessional tax regime on a year on year basis.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>1.3. The  amendment: <\/strong>The restriction onopting the  concessional tax regime on a year to year basis has been extended to  professionals as well.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>1.4. Implication  of the amendment: <\/strong>For the financial year 2020-21 i.e.  Assessment year 2021-22, Individuals &amp; HUF having professional income will  have to choose from opting for or out of the concessional tax regime. The  exercised option will be irrevocable. <strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>2. Residency provisions for Individuals [S. 6 of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>2.1. The  existing law: <\/strong>Clause (b) of Explanation 1 to Section  6(1) of the Act provided that an Indian citizen or a person of Indian origin  shall be Indian resident if he is in India for 182 days instead of 60 days in  that year. This provision provides relaxation to an Indian citizen or a person  of Indian origin allowing them to visit India for longer duration without becoming resident of India.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further, the issue  of stateless persons was in existence &amp; botheration. It was possible for an  individual to arrange his affairs in such a fashion that he is not liable to  tax in any country or jurisdiction during a year. This arrangement was  typically employed by high net worth individuals (HNWI) to avoid paying taxes  to any country\/ jurisdiction on income they earn.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>2.2. The  proposed law: <\/strong>The Finance Bill, 2020 proposed to  that the exception provided in clause (b) of Explanation 1 of sub-section (1)  to section 6 for visiting India in that year be decreased to 120 days from  existing 182 days. <strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further, an  individual or an HUF shall be said to be &ldquo;not ordinarily resident&rdquo; in India in  a previous year, if the individual or the manager of the HUF has been a  non-resident in India in seven out of ten previous years preceding that year.  This new condition would replace the existing conditions in clauses (a) and (b)  of sub-section (6) of section 6. <strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further, an Indian  citizen who is not liable to tax in any other country or territory shall be  deemed to be resident in India.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>2.3. The  amendment:<\/strong> The provision has been made applicable only to Indian Citizens and Person of  Indian Origin visiting India whose total income  exceeds Rs. 15 Lakh (1.5 million Rupees).<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further,  an Individual or HUF becoming a Resident by virtue of the proposed law would be  treated as a &lsquo;Resident but not Ordinary Resident&rsquo;.<\/p>\n<p>Further,  for the purpose of computing the total income of Rs. 15 Lakh, &lsquo;income from  foreign sources&rsquo; has been excluded. The term &lsquo;income from foreign sources&rsquo; has  been explained to mean as income which accrues or arises outside India,  exceptincome derived from business controlled in India or profession set up  inIndia.&nbsp; <\/p>\n<p><strong>2.4. Implication  of the amendment: <\/strong>To further align the proposed law with  the intention of the legislature to tackle the issue of High Net Worth  Individuals who fashionably arrange their stay in India so as to escape the tax nets and not to other tax  payers to whom the erstwhile law provided relaxation to.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>3. Exemption  to certain corpus donation under section 11 of the Act [S. 11 of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>3.1. The existing law: <\/strong>Currently, any donation made by a Charitable trust  or institution to a similar entity out of its current years income with a  specific direction that the same would form the corpus of the other similar  entity was not treated as&nbsp; application of  income in the hands of the donor, thereby not applicable to exemption.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>3.2. The proposed law: <\/strong>The law was amended to introduce Explanation to  section 10(23C) of the Act&nbsp; that any  contribution received by specified institution being university, educational institution,  hospital, other medical institution, with specific direction that they shall  form part of corpus of fund, trust, etc shall not be included in the income of  such institution.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>3.3. The amendment: <\/strong>Similarly, clarifications have been added Explanation 2 to section 11(1)  of the Act so as to extend the benefits provided to tax payers referred under  section 10(23C) of the Act.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>3.4. Implication of  the amendment: <\/strong>Principles of parity has been applied between a tax  payer registered under section 10(23) and section 12AA of the Act.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>4. Exemption of income of sovereign wealth  funds [S. 10 of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>4.1. The  existing law: <\/strong>This provision does not exist in the  existing law and is newly introduced vide Finance Bill, 2020.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>4.2. The  proposed law: <\/strong>Exemption is provided vide section 10  of the Act for income from sovereign wealth fund subject to the satisfaction of  the conditions prescribed.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>4.3. The  amendment: <\/strong>The scope of the exemption has been  widened to include a notified foreign pension fund, Invit, Alternate Investment  Fund (<strong>AIF<\/strong>) subject to certain conditions.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further,  it will cover investments made between April 1, 2020 and March 31, 2024 and  thus, will not cover investments already made prior to April 1, 2020.<\/p>\n<p>Further,  The Central Board of Direct taxes (<strong>CBDT<\/strong>) is empowered to make guidelines for the purpose of  the exemption.<\/p>\n<p><strong>4.4. Implication  of the amendment: <\/strong>The same has been introduced with a  view to increase investment in Infrastructure.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>5. Clarification on exemption of dividends received during  transitional period<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>5.1. The  existing law: (Note which section) <\/strong>As per  the existing law, Dividend was exempted in the hands of the shareholder and the  company issuing dividend was supposed to pay dividend distribution tax (<strong>DDT<\/strong>).<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>5.2. The  proposed law: <\/strong>It was proposed to withdraw the  exemption in the hands of the shareholder thereby scrapping the provisions of  DDT. Thus, making dividend taxable only in the hands of the shareholder.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>5.3. The  amendment: <\/strong>The amendment clarified that there  will be no tax liability in the hands of the shareholder even after March 31, 2020, in the event the Company has already been DDT.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>5.4. Implication  of the amendment: <\/strong>The amendment has provided a  much-needed clarification where dividend is declared\/ DDT has been paid by the  domestic company on or before March 31, 2020 but received by the shareholder on or after April 1, 2020. There will be no incidence of double taxation.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>6. Taxability of dividend income in the hands of unit holders of  REIT and Invit [S. 10(23FD) of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>6.1. The  existing law: <\/strong>Dividend was not taxable in the hands  of the shareholders &amp; unit holders.<\/p>\n<p><strong>6.2. The  proposed law: <\/strong>To amend clause (23FD) of section 10  of the Act to exclude dividend income received by a unit holder from business  trust from the exemption so that the dividend income is taxable in the hand of  unit holder of the business trust.<\/p>\n<p><strong>6.3. The  amendment: <\/strong>Section 10(23FC)(b) of the Act is  amended to make dividend taxable in the hands of the unit holder where the  company declaring the dividend has not opted for the beneficial corporate tax  rate under section 115BAA of the Act. <strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Accordingly,  exemption is provided under section 194LBA of the Act, on dividend paid by such  Business Trust to its unit holders, received by it from such a company.<\/p>\n<p><strong>6.4. Implication  of the amendment: <\/strong>This has removed the incidence of any  duplicated taxation, once in the hands of the SPV held by the business trust  and again in the hands of the unit holder.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>7. Benefit of  inter-corporate dividend deduction [S. 80M of the Act]<\/strong><strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>7.1. The  existing law: <\/strong>This provision does not exist in the existing law and is newly  introduced vide Finance Bill, 2020.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>7.2. The  proposed law: <\/strong>It was proposed to insert new section  80M of the Act as it existed before it removal by the Finance Act, 2003 to  remove the cascading affect, with a change that set off will be allowed only  for dividend distributed by the company one month prior to the due date of  filing of return, in place of due date of filing return earlier.<\/p>\n<p><strong>7.3. The  amendment: <\/strong>The scope of section 80M of the Act is  extended to Foreign Companies and Business Trusts.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>7.4. Implication  of the amendment: <\/strong>This removes the possibility of double  taxation where a domestic company receives dividend from a foreign company or  business trust which is further paid to its shareholders.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>8. Lower rate of TDS for Royalty for sale, distribution or  exhibition of cinematographic films [S. 194J of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>8.1. The  existing law: <\/strong>In case of payment of royalty for sale,  distribution or exhibition of cinematographic films, TDS was applicable at the  rate of 10 per cent under section 194J of the Act.<\/p>\n<p><strong>8.2. The proposed law: <\/strong>On  account of large number of litigations on the issue of short deduction of tax  treating assessee in default where the assessee deducts tax under section 194C,  while the tax officers claim that tax should have been deducted under section  194J of the Act, the Finance Bill, 2020 proposed to reduce the rate of TDS for  &lsquo;Fee from technical services&rsquo; from 10 percent to 2 per cent.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>8.3. The amendment: <\/strong>The  amendment extends the reduced TDS rate of 2 per cent where payment is made in  the nature of royalty for sale,  distribution or exhibition of cinematographic films (other than professional  fees).<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>8.4. Implication of the  amendment:<\/strong> This amendment brings the withholding rate for payment in the  nature of &lsquo;Royalty&rsquo; at par with the proposed withholding rate for payment in  the nature of &lsquo;Fee for technical services&rsquo;.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>This amendment is on account of  representations from the film industry. This will reduce the burden of TDS for  the sector and aid a better position in their cash flows.<\/p>\n<p><strong>9. Non-applicability of  withholding on redemption\/ repurchase made by mutual funds to unit holders [S.  10(23D) of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>9.1. The existing law: <\/strong>Dividend  was not taxable in the hands of the shareholders &amp; unit holders.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>9.2. The proposed law: <\/strong>It was  proposed to insert a new section 194K to provide that any person responsible  for paying to a resident any income in respect of units of a Mutual Fund  specified under clause (23D) of section 10 of the Act or units from the  administrator of the specified undertaking or units from the specified company  shall at the time of credit of such income to the account of the payee or at  the time of payment thereof by any mode, whichever is earlier, deduct  income-tax there on at the rate of ten per cent. It may also be provided for threshold  limit of Rs 5,000\/- so that income below this amount does not suffer tax  deduction. <strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>9.3. The amendment: <\/strong>The  amendment clarifies that section 194K of the Act shall not apply if the income  is in nature of capital gains arising on sale of units of Mutual Fund units  specified under section 10(23D) of the Act or units from the administrative of  the specified undertaking or units from specified company.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>9.4. Implication of the  amendment: <\/strong>Although this amendment has provided a much-needed clarification  on non-applicability of TDS on payment in the nature of capital gain, it raises  concerns where the units are held as stock in trade for the purpose of business  income.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>10. Withholding on Cash  withdrawals [S. 194N of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>10.1. The existing law: <\/strong>Section  194N of the Act was inserted vide Finance Act, 2019 for withholding of tax at  the rate of 2 per cent on cash payments in excess of Rs. 1 Crore (10 Million  Rupees) made during the year by a banking company\/ co-operative bank\/ post  office to a person from one or more accounts maintained with it by the  recipient.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>10.2. The proposed law: <\/strong>There  was no law proposed by the Finance Act, 2020.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>10.3. The amendment: <\/strong>It has  been clarified that the withholding tax shall apply on entire payments made  during the year.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further, an amendment has been  made to provide for a higher rate of withholding on a payment made to a person  who hasn&rsquo;t filed return of income for immediately three preceding Assessment  years relevant to previous year and time limit for filing return of income  under section 139(1) of the Act has expired. In such a situation this provision  will be triggered on payment more than Rs. 20 lakhs (2 Million Rupees); and  when the payment is more than Rs. 1 Crore (10 Million Rupees) it will attract  withholding at 5 per cent instead of 2 per cent on amount exceeding Rs. 20  lakhs (2 Million Rupees).<\/p>\n<p><strong>10.4. Implication of the  amendment: <\/strong>The amendment provides a much-needed clarification with respect  to the deduction and also penalises non-return filers with a higher rate.  Further, the Central Government is empowered to notify non-filers to whom such  provision shall not apply. <strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>11. Withholding on  e-commerce operators [S. 194-O of the Act] <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>11.1. The existing law: <\/strong>Section  194-O of the Act is a newly inserted provision vide the Finance Act, 2020.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>11.2. The proposed law: <\/strong>The  newly inserted section requires withholding at the rate of 1 per cent on  ecommerce transactions, by e-commerce operator on value of sale of goods or provision  of service facilitated by it through its digital or electronic facility or  platform at the time of credit of amount of sale or service or both to the  account of e-commerce participant or at the time of payment thereof to such  participant by any mode, whichever is earlier.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>11.3. The amendment:<\/strong> The applicability of  the proposed law has been under section 194-O of the Act has been deferred from  April 1, 2020 to October   1, 2020.<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further, the definition of &lsquo;e-commerce  operator&rsquo; has been amended to remove the words &ldquo;<em>and is responsible to paying  e-commerce participator<\/em>&rdquo; and to limit the definition &ldquo;<em>to a person who  owns, operates or manages digital or electronic facility or platform for  electronic commerce<\/em>.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>Further, the amendment has inserted subsection  6 to clarify that <em>&ldquo;e-commerce operator shall be deemed to be person  responsible for paying to e-commerce participant&rdquo;.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Further, the Central Government has been  empowered to issue guidelines for the purpose for the purpose of removing any  difficulties in the implementation of the section.<\/p>\n<p><strong>11.4. Implication of the amendment: <\/strong>The amendment is  creating a deeming fiction in the definition of <em>&lsquo;e-commerce operator&rsquo;<\/em>.  This would extend the definition to transactions where the e-commerce operator  merely facilitates the transaction and is not involved in the process of  collection.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>12. Withholding rate on dividend  received by Non-resident Individuals and foreign companies [First Schedule to  the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>12.1. The existing law: <\/strong>Dividend was not  taxable in the hands of the shareholders &amp; unit holders. For a Non-resident  recipient, the withholding rate is 20 per cent or rate specified in the treaty,  whichever is beneficial. <strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>12.2. The proposed law: <\/strong>The Finance Act, 2020  proposed to remove DDT and make dividends taxable in the hands of the shareholder\/unit  holder.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>However, on account of no rate being provided  in the First Schedule to the Finance Bill, 2020 it would be implied that the  rate of withholding would be at the residual higher rate of 30 per cent or 40  per cent (plus applicable surcharge and cess) as applicable to any other income  payable to such non-residents.<\/p>\n<p><strong>12.3. The amendment: <\/strong>The amendment  clarifies that, the rate of withholding at 20 per cent. <strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>12.4. Implication of the amendment: <\/strong>The amendment brings  in the much-required clarification with regard to the rate of withholding.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>13. Relaxation for TCS on LRS  remittances and import and export of goods [S. 206C of the Act]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>13.1. The existing law: <\/strong>The widening of the  scope of section 206C of the Act was newly introduced vide Finance Bill, 2020.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>13.2. The proposed law: <\/strong>It was proposed that A  seller of goods is liable to collect TCS at the rate of 0.1 per cent on  consideration received from a buyer in a previous year in excess of fifty lakh  rupees. In non-PAN\/ Aadhaar cases the rate shall be one per cent. <\/p>\n<p>Further, only those sellers whose total sales,  gross receipts or turnover from the business carried on by it exceed ten crore  rupees (100 Million Rupees) during the financial year immediately preceding the  financial year, shall be liable to collect such TCS.<\/p>\n<p><strong>13.3. The amendment: <\/strong>The definition of  buyer has been amended to exclude export of goods and import of goods.<\/p>\n<p>Further, the applicability of the provision  has been deferred from April 1, 2020 to October   1, 2020. <\/p>\n<p><strong>13.4. Implication of the amendment:<\/strong> This is a much-needed  clarification as the intent is not to tax overseas buyers of Indian goods.  Since these entities are based abroad, they do not have any tax liability in India and the intention is  not to bring them under the tax net.<\/p>\n<p><strong>14. Equalisation Levy on e-commerce  transactions [Chapter VII of the Finance Act, 2016]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>14.1. The existing law: <\/strong>Currently,  Equalisation Levy is charged on payment to Non-resident having no Permanent  Establishment (<strong>PE<\/strong>) in India for online  advertisement services.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>14.2. The proposed law: <\/strong>There was no change in  law proposed vide the Finance Bill, 2020. However, it was proposed to amend the  source rule as per the discussion going on in international forum, countries  generally agree that income from advertisement that targets Indian customers or  income from sale of data collected from India or income from sale of goods and  services using such data collected from India, needs to be accounted for in  Indian revenue<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>14.3. The amendment: <\/strong>The amendment has  enlarged the scope of Equalisation levy to e-commerce supply or services  provided by Non-resident operators who owns, operates or manages a digital or  electronic facility or platform for online sale of goods or services or both.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Further, &ldquo;e-commerce supply or services&rdquo; has  been defined to mean-<\/p>\n<p>(i) online sale of  goods owned by the e-commerce operator; or<\/p>\n<p>(ii) online provision  of services provided by the e-commerce operator; or<\/p>\n<p>(iii) online sale of  goods or provision of services or both, facilitated by the e-commerce operator;  or<\/p>\n<p>(iv) any combination  of activities listed in clause (i), (ii) or (iii)&rsquo;;<\/p>\n<p>Further, section 165A to the Finance Act, 2016 is  introduce, to explain the applicability and non-applicability of this levy:<\/p>\n<p>As per section 165A of the Finance Act, 2016 equalisation  levy shall at the rate of two per cent, of the amount of consideration received  or receivable by an e-commerce operator from e-commerce supply or services made  or provided or facilitated, by supply it<em>&#8211;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>(i) to a person resident in India; or<\/p>\n<p>(ii) to a non-resident in the specified circumstances; or<\/p>\n<p>(iii) to a person who buys such goods or services or both  using internet protocol address located in India <\/p>\n<p>Further, Equalisation levy shall not be charged-<\/p>\n<p>(i) where the e-commerce operator making or providing or  facilitating e-commerce supply or services has a permanent establishment in  India and Such e-commerce supply or services is effectively connected with such  permanent establishment;<\/p>\n<p>(ii) where the equalisation levy is leviable under section  165 i.e. Online advertisement; or<\/p>\n<p>(iii) sales, turnover or gross receipts, as the case may  be, of the e-commerce operator from the e-commerce supply or made or provided  or facilitated is less than two crore rupees during the previous year.<\/p>\n<p>Further, due date has been specified under section 166A of  the Finance Act, 2016 for every e-commerce operator to the credit of the  Central Government for the quarter the Equalisation Levy liability as per  section 165A of the Finance Act, 2016.<\/p>\n<table border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"5\">\n<tr>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p><strong>Date of ending of the quarter of financial year<\/strong> <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p><strong>Due date of the financial year<\/strong> <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p>30th&nbsp;June <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p>7th&nbsp;July <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p>30th&nbsp;September <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p>7th&nbsp;October <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p>31st&nbsp;December <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p>7th&nbsp;January <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p>31st&nbsp;March <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<td valign=\"top\">\n<p>31st&nbsp;March. <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p>Further, penalty for non-compliance  for the above has also been provided under section 170 of the Finance Act,  2016.<\/p>\n<p><strong>14.4. Implication of the amendment: <\/strong>The proposed expansion  of the scope of Equalisation levy results in several issues of determination of  tax base, cascading effect, nexus requirement, scope of residence, availability  of foreign tax credit, etc.<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>IV. CONCLUSION<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The amendments brought in have been mostly in the nature  of clarification or removing any difficulties in implementation the Finance  Bill, 2020. The Equalisation Levy is majorly the key insertion vide the  amendment.<\/p>\n<p>Further, in absence of a formal discussion in the Lok  Sabha, tax professionals are expected to engage in further studies and  discussion to better understand the amendments and its implications.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Article(s) for  reference:<br \/>\n  <\/strong><br \/>\n  <a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/demystifying-the-indian-taxation-regime-on-e-commerce\/\"><strong>Demystifying The  Indian Taxation Regime On E-Commerce<\/strong><\/a><strong> by Ms. Snehal Kanzarkar and Ms. Sara  Jain<\/strong><\/p>\n<table width=\"103%\" border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"5\" cellspacing=\"0\" bgcolor=\"#FFFFCC\">\n<tr>\n<td><strong>Disclaimer: <\/strong>The  contents of this document are solely for informational purpose. It does not  constitute professional advice or a formal recommendation. While due care has  been taken in preparing this document, the existence of mistakes and omissions  herein is not ruled out. Neither the author nor itatonline.org and its  affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising  out of any inaccurate or incomplete information in this document nor for any  actions taken in reliance thereon. No part of this document should be  distributed or copied (except for personal, non-commercial use) without  express written permission of itatonline.org<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Advocate Shashi Ashok Bekal has conducted a systematic analysis of the numerous important amendments ushered in by the <a href=\"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/download-finance-act-2020\/\">Finance Act 2020<\/a>. He has explained in a comprehensive manner the current law, the proposed law, the amendment to the proposed law, and its implications on tax payers and tax man<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/amendments-to-the-finance-bill-2020-analysis-of-key-amendments\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6876","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6876","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6876"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6876\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6876"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6876"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6876"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}