VittSphere ONE Calculators Blog CA Prabhakar Kumar · FCA · ICAI 560762
Case lawIncome-tax Act 2025Chapter XVII › Section 306
Chapter XVIIwas s.163

Section 306 of the Income-tax Act, 2025

Section 306 — Who may be regarded as agent. Successor to s.163 of the 1961 Act.

Where this section sits

Section 306 is in Chapter XVII — Special Provisions Relating to Certain Persons, which runs from section 302 to section 355.

← Section 305  ·  Section 307 →

What this section does

Sub-section (1) defines who may be regarded as an "agent" in relation to a non-resident for the purposes of the Act. Clause (a) includes any person in India who is employed by or on behalf of the non-resident, who has any business connection with him, from or through whom the non-resident receives any income whether directly or indirectly, or who is the trustee of the non-resident. Clause (b) includes any other person, whether resident or non-resident, who has acquired by means of a transfer a capital asset in India.

Sub-section (2) carves out a broker. A broker in India who, for particular transactions, does not deal directly with or on behalf of a non-resident principal but deals with or through a non-resident broker is not deemed an agent for those transactions, if the transactions are carried on in the ordinary course of business through the first broker and the non-resident broker is carrying on such transactions in the ordinary course of his business and not as a principal.

Sub-section (3) is the procedural safeguard: a person shall not be treated as the agent of a non-resident unless he has had an opportunity of being heard by the Assessing Officer as to his liability to be so treated. Sub-section (4) gives "business connection" the meaning assigned in section 9(9)(a).

Why it is there

A non-resident may have income arising in India and no presence the Department can proceed against, so the Act attaches the assessment to a person in India through whom the income passes or who has a connection with him. Because that exposes a person to liability for someone else's tax, sub-section (3) requires he be heard first.

Who it applies to

What this means in practice

The categories in sub-section (1)(a) do not require an appointment as agent — a business connection alone, or receipt of the non-resident's income through you, is enough. Clause (b) is wider in one respect: it is not limited to a person in India, and it catches a person who has acquired a capital asset in India by transfer, which is how a purchaser can be made the agent of a non-resident seller. The word "includes" means the list is not closed. The real protection is sub-section (3), which is unqualified. The broker exclusion in sub-section (2) is transaction-specific and needs both conditions.

An example

Illustrative only, and invented for this page. The figures are chosen to show the rule biting, not taken from any real matter.

A non-resident sells shares of an Indian company to a resident buyer. Because the buyer has acquired a capital asset in India by means of a transfer, sub-section (1)(b) brings him within the definition of agent in relation to that non-resident. Before he can be treated as the agent and assessed as such, sub-section (3) requires that the Assessing Officer give him an opportunity of being heard on his liability to be so treated.

Where you meet this section

You meet it in a notice from an Assessing Officer proposing to treat you as the agent of a named non-resident and asking why you should not be so treated — the hearing sub-section (3) requires — and then in the assessment made on you in that representative capacity.

The words themselves

A person shall not be treated as the agent of a non-resident unless he has had an opportunity of being heard by the Assessing Officer as to his liability to be treated as such.
Section 306(3), Income-tax Act, 2025.
any other person who, whether a resident or non-resident, has acquired by means of a transfer, a capital asset in India
Section 306(1)(b), Income-tax Act, 2025.

What people get wrong

What this replaced

The correspondence is the Income Tax Department’s own, from its comparison utility for the 1961 and 2025 Acts. A renumbering is the easy half; whether the words changed is the half that decides cases.

See the full 1961 to 2025 concordance.

Circulars of the Board on this section

A circular binds the department, not you and not a court. Every one below was written under the 1961 Act; it reaches this section because the department’s own concordance carries the provision it names to this one.

See the circulars index.

Case law carried across

Read this before you rely on it. Every decision below was decided under the Income-tax Act, 1961. It appears here because it is tagged to a 1961 provision that the department’s own mapping carries to section 306. That is an inference we have drawn, not a holding on the new section: where the words changed in the move, the reasoning may not survive. Treat this as the place to start looking, not as authority on the 2025 Act.

Explainers

Read with

What this page does not tell you. It does not reproduce the section. Everything above was written from the section’s own text as the Income Tax Department publishes it — the text is here, and nothing here is advice on your facts. Where a figure matters, read the sub-section it comes from.