From 1 April 2026, the Income-tax Act, 1961 stands repealed and the Income-tax Act, 2025 governs income tax law in India. For most businesses the arithmetic of tax has not moved. What has moved is almost every section number they have been citing for decades.
That sounds like a cosmetic problem. In practice it is not. Section numbers sit inside tax audit reports, TDS software configurations, board resolutions, loan agreements, transfer pricing documentation, engagement letters, employment contracts and standard-form replies to departmental notices. A reference that was correct in March 2026 may point to an entirely different provision in April 2026.
This article sets out how the renumbering works, which correspondences are officially confirmed, and why the mapping tables circulating online should be treated with caution.
Why every section number changed
The 1961 Act had grown by accretion for six decades. Amendments were inserted as sub-sections, provisos, explanations and lettered sections until a single provision could run for pages. Section 10 alone had accumulated dozens of clauses. Practitioners navigated it by memory rather than by structure.
The 2025 Act is a redrafting exercise rather than a policy exercise. The stated objective was simplification: shorter sentences, tables in place of narrative provisos, formulae in place of descriptive computation language, and the removal of provisions that had become spent. The result is an Act of 536 sections arranged across 23 chapters with 16 schedules, running to roughly half the word count of the statute it replaces.
Because the drafters reorganised subject matter into a cleaner sequence rather than preserving legacy numbering, continuity of section numbers was not an objective. A handful of numbers coincide by accident. Most do not.
What the 2025 Act changed and what it did not
It is worth being precise about the scope of the change, because a good deal of commentary has overstated it.
What did not change. The heads of income remain the same five. Residential status continues to determine the scope of total income. The distinction between business income and capital gains survives. Depreciation, presumptive taxation, set-off and carry-forward of losses, and the deduction architecture all continue in recognisable form. Rates of tax are set by the annual Finance Act, as before, and the 2025 Act did not by itself alter them.
What did change. The vocabulary of “previous year” and “assessment year” has been replaced by a single concept, the tax year, defined in section 3. The withholding provisions that were spread across the 194 series have been consolidated, with section 393 read together with the relevant schedule now carrying the deduction obligations. The presentation of computation provisions has shifted heavily towards tables. And, of course, the numbering.
For a fuller account of the substantive changes taking effect, see our note on the income tax reforms effective 1 April 2026 and the summary of key income tax changes from April 2026.
The structure: 1961 Act against 2025 Act
The safest way to navigate the new Act is by subject matter rather than by remembered section number. At chapter level the correspondence is stable and easy to hold in mind:
| Subject matter | Position under the 1961 Act | Position under the 2025 Act |
|---|---|---|
| Preliminary and definitions | Chapter I | Chapter I |
| Basis of charge, residence, scope of total income | Chapter II | Chapter II |
| Incomes not forming part of total income | Chapter III | Chapter III |
| Computation under the five heads | Chapter IV | Chapter IV, reorganised head by head |
| Income of other persons, clubbing | Chapter V | Chapter V |
| Aggregation, set-off and carry-forward of losses | Chapter VI | Chapter VI |
| Deductions from gross total income | Chapter VI-A | Chapter VIII |
| Special provisions for companies, MAT and AMT | Chapter XII-B | Consolidated in the special-rate chapters |
| Return of income, assessment, reassessment | Chapter XIV | Chapter XIII and following |
| Deduction and collection of tax at source | Chapter XVII-B and XVII-BB | Section 393 with the corresponding schedule |
| Appeals and revision | Chapter XX | The appeals chapter, sequenced CIT(A), Tribunal, High Court, Supreme Court |
| Penalties | Chapter XXI | The penalties chapter |
| Offences and prosecution | Chapter XXII | The offences chapter |
| Repeal and savings | — | Section 536 |
Working from subject matter down to section, rather than from an old number across to a new one, avoids most of the errors we see in practice.
Section numbers that are officially confirmed
There is a meaningful difference between correspondences the Income Tax Department has itself published and correspondences a website has inferred. The following are drawn from departmental material:
| Provision | 1961 Act | 2025 Act |
|---|---|---|
| Tax year (replacing previous year and assessment year) | Sections 2(9) and 3 | Section 3 |
| Deduction of tax at source | Sections 192 to 206 (the 194 series) | Section 393, read with the relevant schedule |
| Income escaping assessment and connected procedure | Sections 147 to 153 | Sections 279 to 286 |
| Repeal of the 1961 Act and savings of pending matters | — | Section 536 |
| Continuation of pending proceedings under the repealed Act | — | Section 536(2)(c) |
| Residual savings through the General Clauses Act, 1897 | — | Section 536(4) |
Section 536 deserves particular attention. It is the provision that keeps the 1961 Act alive for everything that was already under way. A reassessment commenced for assessment year 2024-25 before 1 April 2026 is completed under the 1961 Act. An appeal pending on that date continues to be governed by the old law. A refund a taxpayer had become entitled to under the repealed Act remains payable. Unutilised MAT and AMT credit carried forward under the old sections is treated as eligible credit under the new Act.
The practical consequence is that from April 2026 both statutes operate side by side — the 1961 Act for closed and pending years, the 2025 Act for income arising on and after 1 April 2026.
For anyone with tax litigation already in progress, the governing law is the law that applied when the proceeding began.
Why third-party mapping tables disagree
A large number of concordance tables have been published, and they do not all say the same thing. The withholding provisions are the clearest illustration: some tables assign salary withholding to one section in the 170s, while departmental material treats withholding as consolidated under section 393 with schedule support. Both cannot be right.
The disagreement arises because the 2025 Act does not always map one old section to one new section. A single 1961 provision may be split across several, several may be merged into one, and some content has moved from the body of the Act into a schedule. A table built on the assumption of one-to-one correspondence will misstate exactly those provisions.
For a professional document — an audit report, a reply to a notice, an opinion — an unverified table is not an adequate source. Nor is this article. The correct source is the statute itself, supported by the departmental utility described below.
Using the CBDT comparison utility
The Income Tax Department has published a utility that allows a provision of the 1961 Act to be checked against the corresponding provision of the 2025 Act. It is hosted on incometaxindia.gov.in under the Income-tax Act 2025 heading within Tax Laws and Rules.
A sensible workflow is:
- Identify the old section you have relied on and the specific sub-section or clause, not merely the section number.
- Run it through the departmental utility to obtain the corresponding provision.
- Open the bare text of the new provision and read it. Confirm that the operative language, the thresholds and the exceptions are what you assumed.
- Record both the old and the new reference in your working papers so the basis of the change is traceable.
Two companion documents are worth keeping alongside the utility: the departmental FAQs on interplay and transition, which deal with which Act applies to which period, and the form mapping guide published on the e-filing portal, which pairs the old return and statement forms with their replacements.
These sit alongside the ordinary stream of CBDT notifications that continues to shape day-to-day compliance.
What to update in your own records
The renumbering reaches further into a business’s documents than most teams expect. A practical sweep would cover:
- TDS and TCS systems. Deduction masters, challan narrations and vendor communications that quote 194C, 194J or 194Q by number.
- Tax audit and certification templates. Clause references, annexures and standard remarks.
- Withholding clauses, gross-up clauses, indemnities and tax representations in vendor, employment, loan and shareholder documents. Contracts drafted with an open reference to “the applicable provisions of the Income-tax Act as in force” age better than those citing a number.
- Employee communications. Regime declaration forms, salary structure notes and Form 16 explanatory material.
- Standard replies. Precedent responses to notices, which frequently open by reciting the section under which the notice was issued.
- Board and committee papers. Resolutions authorising tax positions or approving related-party pricing.
Nothing here is urgent in the sense of a deadline, but a document that cites a repealed section is harder to defend later than one that cites the correct provision from the outset.
Three transition traps
Quoting the wrong statute in a reply. A notice for an earlier year is issued under the 1961 Act and must be answered under it. Replacing the old section reference with the new one in a reply is not a tidy-up; it misstates the legal basis of the proceeding.
Assuming the numbering change alters the position. Because the sections look unfamiliar, there is a temptation to reopen settled positions. In most cases the operative language is materially the same and a settled position survives the renumbering. The question to ask is whether the words changed, not whether the number changed.
Treating the withholding consolidation as a rate change. Consolidating the 194 series into section 393 and its schedule reorganises where the obligation is stated. It is not, in itself, a change in who deducts or at what rate. The rate remains a function of the schedule and the annual Finance Act.
Contact Now – +919034263307
Visite websites – taxationlegaladvisor.in
