The exposure is charged by reference to the return and the delay rather than to the tax, so a subsidiary that made a loss or had a nil year still faces a real amount for having filed nothing. For a foreign-owned company there is usually a second cost behind the first: the transfer-pricing report that should have travelled with the return does not exist yet either, and building it after the event means describing a year from memory. We quantify both before filing, so the group is not surprised twice.
What is the late filing penalty for Form ITR-6?
- 15+Years of the founder's cross-border experience
- 18,000+Clients served across our offices in India, the USA, Canada and the UAE
- 5.0Google rating
- 4Global offices — India, USA, Canada & UAE
The corporate return in India, filed by companies other than those claiming charitable exemption. The exposure on this kind of filing is charged by reference to the form and the delay rather than to the tax, which is why an unfiled year with no tax can still be expensive.
What a late filing costs
The corporate return in India, filed by companies other than those claiming charitable exemption.

The exception that catches people
For a foreign-owned Indian company the return travels with a transfer-pricing report, and for a foreign company with an Indian presence the threshold question is what part of its worldwide profit is attributable to India at all.
What to do next
The full treatment — who it binds, the deadline, the penalty and the fixed fee — is on ITR-6 — companies in India. We would rather scope it properly than quote it quickly.
Reviewed for the 2025 and 2026 filing seasons by Udit Gupta, International Tax, Cross-Border Tax & Transfer Pricing Expert, Legal Quotient Consultants. Published as general information. For a position on your own file, call the 24-hour helpline.
What these engagements turn on
Return delayed because the pricing analysis was never started
A subsidiary's corporate return had gone past its date while the group waited for a transfer-pricing report nobody had commissioned. Filing first and documenting later would have fixed prices the report might not support. We built the analysis across the whole open period, then filed the years in order on one consistent basis, with the exposure for the delay quantified in advance. The engagement produced filed years, a transfer-pricing report that matches what was filed, and the analysis moved to the start of the group's year.
Read how this one runsForeign contractor with several unfiled Indian years
A company abroad had run work in India across several years without settling whether any profit was attributable there, so nothing had been filed. The attribution question had to be answered before a single return could be prepared. We documented the activity year by year from site records, contracts and travel logs, formed the attribution position, and filed the open years against it. The engagement produced an attribution analysis covering the whole period and corporate returns consistent with it rather than merely with each other.
Read how this one runsLate Indian return blocking a credit claim in the parent's country
A parent's own return was due and included relief for Indian tax that the subsidiary had not yet established, because the Indian return was outstanding. We took the Indian filing first, settled the liability, and gave the parent's advisers an assessed figure to claim rather than an estimate. The engagement produced a filed Indian year, a relief claim supported by an actual assessment, and a written sequence the group now follows when the two deadlines fall close together.
Read how this one runsReturn filed punctually on the wrong basis and then refiled
A subsidiary had filed on time using intercompany charges an earlier adviser had set without documentation, and the basis did not survive examination. Correcting it meant a further filing, and the delay was counted from the original date for the part that had not properly been delivered. We rebuilt the pricing analysis, refiled, and recorded why the first filing did not settle the position. The engagement produced a corrected return, supporting documentation, and a clear account of the sequence for the group's own file.
Read how this one runsCanadian parent facing the higher late rate while India stayed open
A parent in Canada had received a demand to file in an earlier year and had a penalty charged, which exposed it to the higher rate on any further late return. Its own figures depended on an Indian subsidiary year that was not finished. We produced a supported interim position for the parent to file and pay against, completed the Indian return, and then confirmed the figures. The engagement produced both returns filed and the parent's exposure held at the ordinary rate rather than the repeat one.
Read how this one runsDormant company brought current from the oldest year forward
A group discovered an Indian entity it had forgotten, retained years earlier for a permission and never dissolved. Several returns were outstanding. We confirmed the entity had traded in none of the open years, gathered the statutory and banking evidence for each, and filed from the oldest year forward so the record reads continuously. The engagement produced a complete filing history for the entity, a written dormancy confirmation for each year, and a decision point for the group on whether to keep it at all.
Read how this one runsTen Years of Missed Returns Filed as One Engagement
Filing many years at once is a sequencing problem: carry-forwards, instalments and credits from the earliest year feed the latest. Filing them out of order is what turns a recoverable position into an assessed one.
Read how this one runsInterest and Penalties Put to a Relief Application
Relief is discretionary and is decided on the circumstances that caused the delay, evidenced year by year. The application is built from the same chronology the filings rest on, so the two cannot contradict each other.
Read how this one runsAll case studies — every published engagement in one place.
Core International & Cross-Border Tax Services
Strategy and compliance for income, assets and families spread across borders.
Industries & Client Types We Serve Worldwide
- Foreign VAT / GST / sales tax registrations
- Marketplace withholding reviews
- Inventory nexus & PE analysis
- Multi-currency books reconciled
- Cross-border revenue sourcing & withholding
- IP structuring with real substance
- Equity for cross-border teams
- U.S. expansion: entity & PE setup
- Reg 105 / 102 waivers
- Permanent establishment risk
- Partner mobility planning
- Cross-border withholding recovery
- Section 216 rental returns
- FIRPTA withholding recovery
- Section 116 clearance
- Treaty credit optimization
- Transfer pricing documentation (s.247)
- Customs value vs transfer price
- Foreign affiliate reporting (T1134)
- Country-by-country reporting
Performance income is taxed where earned — Regulation 105 in Canada, withholding agreements in the U.S. — with special treaty articles overriding the usual rules.
Performance income is taxed where the performance happens, and the deduction is usually taken at source on the gross fee before expenses. Recovering the difference is a filing exercise in the other country, and it only works if the tour, the residency and the withholding certificates were documented while the work was being done.
- Reg 105 & U.S. CWA agreements
- Multi-state & country calendars
- Touring income allocation
- Royalty & image-rights withholding
- Residency analysis before moving
- Employer payroll exposure
- Totalization & social security
- Foreign tax credits
- Treaty access & PPT reviews
- FAPI & surplus computations
- Withholding-efficient routing
- Governance & substance
More on Form ITR-6
Practically, yes, if the return is to be filed on figures that hold. The return for a foreign-owned company travels with a transfer-pricing report, and filing on intercompany prices the report will not ultimately support means revisiting the return as well. Where several years are open we build the analysis once across the whole period, then file the years in order on a consistent basis. Filing a single year in isolation is quicker and tends to create the inconsistency the next year then has to explain.
Yes. Dormancy removes the tax, not the filing obligation, and the exposure for lateness attaches to the return that was due. This is the commonest version of the problem we see: a company retained for a licence or a lease, nobody instructed to file, and several years discovered at once. It is also the simplest to clear, because a year with no trading has little behind it to reconstruct and nothing accruing on an unpaid balance. Delay is what turns a straightforward year into an expensive one.
For the 2025 tax year the Canada Revenue Agency charges 5% of the balance owing on a late return, plus 1% of that balance for each full month it stays outstanding, to a maximum of 12 months. The penalty does not compound, but interest compounds daily on the unpaid balance. Those figures are Canadian and say nothing about the Indian charge on a late corporate return, which follows its own rules. When both are open we deal first with the side where interest is running on real money.
Often, in two ways. The parent may need the subsidiary's tax position for its own reporting, and where relief for Indian tax is claimed abroad the claim rests on tax actually established, which an unfiled return has not established. The practical effect is that the parent either files without the claim or files on an estimate to be amended. Where a group has both open we set the order deliberately, usually completing the Indian year the foreign claim depends on before the foreign return is delivered.
Not automatically, and the idea that a second late year simply doubles everything is wrong. On the Canadian side the higher rate for the 2025 tax year, 10% of the balance owing plus 2% for each full month to a maximum of 20 months, applies where the Canada Revenue Agency issued a demand to file and charged a late-filing penalty in any of the three preceding tax years. Repetition on its own does not trigger it; a demand plus a charged penalty does. India works out its own charge under its own rules.
They are the certification pair required before certain remittances leave India. Form 15CA is the remitter's declaration filed online; Form 15CB is the accountant's certificate supporting the tax treatment and the rate applied, including any treaty relief. Which combination you need depends on the nature and size of the payment, and banks will generally not process the remittance without them. See Form 15CA.
Yes, by filing an Indian return for the year. Withholding on rent, interest, dividends, professional fees or a property sale is an advance payment, not a final tax, so where the actual liability is lower — because of the treaty, because of the basic exemption, or because the deduction was computed on gross proceeds rather than gain — the excess comes back as a refund. It needs your PAN, a validated Indian bank account and the deductor's statement filed. See Indian filing and credit claims.



