Form 15CB, now Form 146: the accountant's certificate on a foreign remittance
Needed for one situation out of four. What it certifies is narrower than people assume, and what it protects is narrower still.
It is a Chartered Accountant's certificate on a foreign remittance, required only for Part C — where the payment is chargeable to tax, the year's total to that payee exceeds ₹5 lakh, and you hold no officer's certificate. From 1 April 2026 it is Form 146, under rule 220 of the Income-tax Rules, 2026.
If you miss it: The declaration cannot be completed without it, and the bank will not process the transfer without the declaration. Where the accountant then asks for a document that takes a week to obtain, the remittance misses its date.
Form 15CB, rule 37BB up to 31 Mar 2026 · Form 146, rule 220 from 1 Apr 2026 · checked 10 September 2026
Key takeaways
- It is needed for Part C only. Three conditions have to be met together, and if any one fails you do not need it.
- Form 15CB became Form 146 from 1 April 2026. The certificate itself is unchanged.
- The accountant certifies the taxability, the rate and the amount deducted — not that the payment is a good idea.
- It has to exist before the declaration is completed, because it is drawn into it. Leaving it to the transfer date is how remittances miss their date.
- It does not protect the remitter if the position turns out to be wrong. The liability for failing to deduct stays with the remitter.
The Income-tax Act, 2025 replaced the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 1 April 2026 and renumbered almost everything. It did not renumber your notice. Under the repeal-and-savings provision, an assessment, reassessment, appeal or penalty for a tax year before 1 April 2026 stays under the 1961 Act — even where the notice itself arrives after that date. So the number that governs the letter in your hand is decided by the year the letter is about, not by the date it was posted. Both numbers are given on every page here, with the governing one first.
“The provisions of the repealed Income-tax Act shall continue to apply to any proceeding pending on the date of commencement of this Act and to any proceedings initiated on or after the 1st April, 2026 (including notices, assessment, reassessment, recomputation, rectification, penalty, reference, revision and appeals) in respect of any tax year beginning before the 1st April, 2026.”
- Notice about 2025-26 or earlier
- The Income-tax Act, 1961 numbering is the one that governs it — s. 143(2), s. 156, s. 220, Form 26AS, Form 16. That is most letters arriving in 2026.
- Notice about 2026-27 or later
- The Income-tax Act, 2025 numbering governs — s. 270(8), s. 289, s. 411, Form 168, Form 130. In practice, letters from 2027 onward.
When you actually need one — and when you do not
The certificate is required for one situation only, and it is defined by three conditions that must all hold at the same time. If any one of them fails, no certificate is required and an accountant does not need to be involved at all.
- The remittance is chargeable to tax in India. If it is not, the declaration is Part D and there is no certificate.
- The aggregate of remittances to that payee during the financial year exceeds ₹5 lakh. If it does not, the declaration is Part A and there is no certificate.
- You do not hold an order or certificate from the Assessing Officer determining the sum chargeable. If you do, the declaration is Part B and the officer's determination does the work instead.
Keep the year's aggregate to that payee within ₹5 lakh, where the commercial arrangement genuinely allows it — but do not split a single payment artificially to get under a threshold, which is a different thing and a worse idea. Or obtain an officer's certificate determining the sum chargeable, which costs more effort up front and is worth considerably more if the payment is ever questioned, because a departmental determination carries weight that an accountant's opinion does not.
What the accountant is actually certifying
This is narrower than people assume, and the narrowness matters when something goes wrong.
The certificate addresses the tax treatment of the remittance: the nature of the payment, whether it is chargeable to tax in India and under which provision, whether a treaty applies and at what rate, the amount of tax deducted, and the rate at which it was deducted. It is a professional opinion on a tax position, supported by the documents the accountant has been given.
It is not a certificate that the transaction is commercially sound, that the money is yours to send, that foreign exchange rules have been complied with, or that the invoice reflects anything real. The accountant is opining on the tax characterisation of a payment described to them, on documents supplied to them.
The obligation to deduct sits with the remitter, and it stays there. If the payment turns out to have been chargeable at a higher rate than certified, the remitter is the one who failed to deduct, with the tax, the interest and the exposure to being treated as in default attaching to them. A certificate obtained in good faith on full disclosure is evidence that the position was taken reasonably. It is not a shield, and it is certainly not a shield where the accountant was not told everything.
What to give the accountant, and why they may decline
A certificate is issued on documents. An accountant asked to certify a characterisation with nothing behind it will either ask for more or decline, and both of those cost time that a remittance timetable usually does not have.
- The invoice or agreement, in enough detail to characterise what is actually being paid for. "Consultancy" on a one-line invoice is not enough to distinguish fees for technical services from a payment for goods.
- The payee's details, including their country of residence and their tax status there.
- Where a treaty rate is claimed: the tax residency certificate and the treaty-relief declaration. Without both, the treaty rate is not available and the certificate will reflect the domestic rate.
- Where services were performed, and by whom — which frequently decides chargeability on its own.
- The running total of remittances to that payee for the financial year.
- Any earlier certificate or officer's order on the same arrangement.
Usually not because the position is wrong, but because it cannot be established from what they have been given — an invoice too vague to characterise, a missing residency certificate for a claimed treaty rate, or a description of services that does not settle where they were performed. Almost all of this is fixable in a day if it is asked for in advance and fatal to the timetable if it is discovered on the transfer date.
How the certificate and the declaration fit together
- 1Work out whether you are in Part C at all, using the three conditions. Most remittances are not.
- 2Assemble the documents and brief the accountant, giving the full picture rather than the conclusion you would like.
- 3The accountant issues the certificate, which is filed and carries its own acknowledgement.
- 4The certificate is then drawn into the remitter's declaration — so the order is certificate first, declaration second, and it cannot be done the other way round.
- 5File the declaration before the remittance, and take the acknowledgement to the bank.
- 6Keep both with the transaction record, along with the documents the certificate was issued on.
| The declaration | The certificate | |
|---|---|---|
| Called | Form 15CA → Form 145 | Form 15CB → Form 146 |
| Filed by | The remitter | A Chartered Accountant |
| Required | For every qualifying remittance, in one of four Parts | For Part C only |
| Comes | Second | First — it is drawn into the declaration |
| Says | What the remitter asserts about the payment | A professional opinion on chargeability, rate and deduction |
Rule 37BB of the 1962 Rules up to 31 March 2026; rule 220 of the Income-tax Rules, 2026 from 1 April 2026.
What it costs, and how long to allow
Fees vary widely with the complexity of the characterisation and with the firm. A straightforward, well-documented remittance — a clear invoice, a clean treaty position, a residency certificate already in hand — is at the low end. A payment whose characterisation is genuinely arguable, or where the documents need chasing, is a different piece of work and priced accordingly. No honest page can quote you a number, and any that does is quoting one firm.
Timing is the more useful thing to plan for. Where the documents are complete, a certificate is not a long job. Where they are not, the delay is the time it takes to obtain a residency certificate from a foreign authority, or to get a properly particularised invoice out of a counterparty — both of which can take weeks and neither of which the accountant controls.
The practical rule is to start the certificate when the payment is agreed, not when it is due. Where remittances to the same payee recur, the characterisation work is largely done once and the subsequent certificates are quicker, which is worth saying to the accountant at the outset.
Worked examples
Example 1: A remittance that did not need a certificate at all
- Payment
- ₹3,80,000 to a foreign designer
- Chargeable
- Yes
- Year's total to that payee
- ₹3,80,000
- 1.Chargeable, so not Part D.
- 2.But the year's aggregate to that payee does not exceed ₹5 lakh, so it falls in Part A.
- 3.Part A requires no accountant's certificate.
- 4.The running total matters for the rest of the year: a further ₹1,30,000 to the same payee would cross the threshold and put the next remittance into Part C.
No certificate, no fee. Worth checking the three conditions before engaging anyone — a good proportion of the people who arrive at this subject do not need the certificate they came for.
Example 2: A treaty rate the accountant could not certify
- Payment
- ₹18,00,000, royalties
- Treaty rate claimed
- Lower than the domestic rate
- Residency certificate
- Not obtained
- 1.The treaty rate depends on the payee being resident in the treaty country, and the evidence of that is a residency certificate from the authority there.
- 2.Without it, the accountant cannot certify the treaty rate — not because they doubt it, but because it is not established.
- 3.The choices are to obtain the certificate, which takes as long as the foreign authority takes, or to deduct at the domestic rate and have the payee reclaim the difference by filing an Indian return.
- 4.Neither is quick, and the first is materially better for the payee.
The commonest reason a certificate stalls, and it is entirely avoidable. Where a treaty rate is going to be claimed, the residency certificate is the first thing to start, not the last.
Example 3: A certificate that did not protect the remitter
- Payment
- ₹25,00,000 for software
- Described to the accountant as
- Purchase of a product
- Certified
- Not chargeable
- Actually
- A licence, with usage restrictions
- 1.The characterisation of a software payment as a purchase or a licence turns on what the agreement actually grants, and the agreement was not given to the accountant.
- 2.The certificate was issued on the description supplied, and the description was incomplete.
- 3.The obligation to deduct stayed with the remitter throughout. A certificate obtained on partial disclosure does not move it.
- 4.The consequences of failing to deduct — the tax, the interest, the exposure to being treated as in default — land on the remitter.
The certificate is only as good as what the accountant was told. Withholding the agreement to get a cleaner answer produces a cleaner certificate and exactly the same liability.
More questions about this page
When is Form 15CB required?▼
Is Form 15CB now Form 146?▼
What does the Chartered Accountant actually certify?▼
Does a Form 15CB certificate protect me if the position is wrong?▼
Which comes first, Form 15CA or Form 15CB?▼
What documents does the accountant need?▼
Can a Chartered Accountant refuse to issue Form 15CB?▼
How much does Form 15CB cost?▼
Can I avoid needing Form 15CB?▼
Do I need Form 15CB for remittances from my NRO account?▼
Official sources checked
The statutes, rules and regulator pages the statements on this page were checked against.
- Income-tax Rules, 2026 — rule 220, with Form 145 (declaration) and Form 146 (accountant's certificate)Notified by CBDT Notification No. 22/2026, G.S.R. 198(E), 20 March 2026, applying to remittances made on or after 1 April 2026. Form 146 is required where Part C of Form 145 applies.
- Income-tax Act, 2025 — s. 395(1) and (2), the officer's certificate that removes the need for an accountant's certificateThe successor to ss. 195(2)/(3) and 197 of the 1961 Act.
- Income-tax Rules, 1962 — rule 37BB, with Forms 15CA and 15CBGoverns remittances made up to 31 March 2026.
You are here
Working out whether a Chartered Accountant's certificate is needed, and what they will need from you
What to do next
- 1
If you have not worked out which Part you are in
Three questions decide it, and most remittances turn out not to need a certificate at all.
Form 15CA, now Form 145 → - 2
If you would rather have the department's view than an accountant's
An officer's certificate determining the sum chargeable moves the remittance into Part B and carries more weight if it is ever questioned.
Lower TDS certificate → - 3
If a treaty rate is being claimed
The accountant cannot certify it without the residency certificate and the declaration — start those first, not last.
Form 10F, now Form 41 → - 4
If the remittance follows a property sale
The withholding on the sale itself is computed on the whole price rather than the gain, which is the larger problem.
Form 128 →
This page is general information about procedure and deadlines, checked against the provisions in force on the date shown. It is not advice on your own assessment, and a notice that looks routine can turn on facts a page cannot see. Where money or a limitation period is at stake, put the notice in front of a practising Chartered Accountant.