News Details- (Get Professional Updates on Whatsapp, Msg on
8285393786) More
News
CBDT clarifies differential regime between domestic investors (including AIF category III) and FPIs
The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) said today that an incorrect perception is being created in a section of media as if announcements made by Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman, Union Minister of Finance & Corporate Affairs, in a press conference on 23rd August 2019, which brought in a number of responsive structural measures to boost up the economy, have created a differential regime between FPIs and domestic investors including AIF category III.
Dispelling this false impression being created in certain sections of media including social media, CBDT said that differential regime between domestic investors (including AIF category III) and FPIs existed even prior to the General Budget 2019 and was therefore not the creation of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 or the announcement made by the Finance Ministry on 23rd August 2019.
In this regard, CBDT has further stated that in case of Foreign Institutional Investors (FPIs), Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) contains special provisions [section 115AD read with section 2(14) of the Act] for taxation of income from derivatives. Under this regime, income of FPIs arising from derivatives was treated as capital gains and liable for special rate of tax as per section 115AD of the Act. However, income arising from derivatives for the domestic investors including Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) category-III as well as for foreign investors who are not FPIs, has always been treated as business income and not as capital gains, and taxed at applicable normal income tax rates. The differential regime therefore already existed for FPIs through Section 115 AD. Therefore, to say that General Budget 2019 or FM’s announcement on 23rd August 2019 created a differential regime between FPI and domestic investor is incorrect. #casansaar (Source - PIB)
Dispelling this false impression being created in certain sections of media including social media, CBDT said that differential regime between domestic investors (including AIF category III) and FPIs existed even prior to the General Budget 2019 and was therefore not the creation of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 or the announcement made by the Finance Ministry on 23rd August 2019.
In this regard, CBDT has further stated that in case of Foreign Institutional Investors (FPIs), Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) contains special provisions [section 115AD read with section 2(14) of the Act] for taxation of income from derivatives. Under this regime, income of FPIs arising from derivatives was treated as capital gains and liable for special rate of tax as per section 115AD of the Act. However, income arising from derivatives for the domestic investors including Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) category-III as well as for foreign investors who are not FPIs, has always been treated as business income and not as capital gains, and taxed at applicable normal income tax rates. The differential regime therefore already existed for FPIs through Section 115 AD. Therefore, to say that General Budget 2019 or FM’s announcement on 23rd August 2019 created a differential regime between FPI and domestic investor is incorrect. #casansaar (Source - PIB)
****
Category : CBDT | Comments : 0 | Hits : 331
Get Free Daily Updates Via e-Mail on Income Tax, Service tax, Excise and Corporate law
Search News
News By Categories More Categories
- Income Tax Dept serves notices to salaried individuals for documentary proof to claim exemptions
- Bank Branch Audit 2021 - Update on allotment of Branches
- Bank Branch Audit 2020 Updates
- Bank Branch Audit 2021 Updates
- Bank Branch Audit 2020 - Update on Allotment of Branches
- Police Atrocities towards CA in Faridabad - Its Time to be Unite
- Bank Branch Statutory Audit Updates 2019
- Bank Branch Statutory Audit Updates
- Bank Branch Audit 2022 Updates
- Bank Branch Statutory Audit Updates
- NFRA Imposes Monetary penalty of Rs 1 Crore on M/s Dhiraj & Dheeraj
- ICAI notifies earlier announced CA exam dates despite pending legal challenge before SC
- NFRA debars Auditors, imposes Rs 50 lakh penalties for lapses in Brightcom, CMIL cases
- GST Important Update - Enhancement in the GST Portal
- NFRA Slaps Rs 5 lakh Penalty on Audit Firm for lapses in Vikas WSP Audit Case
- CBDT extends due date for filing Form 10A/10AB upto 30th June, 2024
- RBI comes out with FEMA regulations for direct listing on international exchange
- RBI directs payment firms to track high-value, fishy transactions during elections
- NCLT orders insolvency proceedings against Subhash Chandra
- Income Tax dept starts drive to dispose of appeals, 0.54 million at last count
- Payment of MCA fees –electronic mode-regarding
- Budget '11-12' Parliament Completes Approval Exercise
- Satyam restrained from operating its accounts
- ICICI a foreign firm, subject to FDI norms: Govt
- Maha expects Rs 15 crore entertainment tax revenue from IPL
- CAG blames PMO for not acting against Kalmadi
- No service tax on visa facilitators: CBEC
- Provision of 15-minutes reading and planning time allowance to the candidates of Chartered Accountants Examinations
- Companies Bill to be taken up in Monsoon Session
- File Service Tax Return in time as Maximum Penalty increased 10 times to Rs. 20000

Comments