Our Expert in India
No results available
The landscape for wills & estates lawyers India practitioners and their clients shifted fundamentally when the Repealing & Amending Act, 2025 omitted Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, making probate optional rather than mandatory in a wide range of succession scenarios. Executors, heirs and NRIs now face an immediate operational question: if probate is no longer compulsory, what evidence must they present to banks, sub-registrars and depositories to act on a will? This guide provides the practical checklists, tax compliance steps and FEMA repatriation procedures that follow from the 2026 changes, structured so that private clients, family office advisors and probate practitioners can act with confidence.
Every statutory and regulatory claim below is referenced to the Gazette of India, Press Information Bureau, Reserve Bank of India or Income-tax Department primary sources.
No. The Repealing & Amending Act, 2025 (Act No. 37 of 2025), as published in the Gazette of India, omitted Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The Press Information Bureau confirmed this omission in its official factsheet on the Act. In practice, probate is now optional for many estates, but “optional” does not mean “unnecessary.” Third parties such as banks, sub-registrar offices and depositories retain discretion to demand whatever evidence of title they consider prudent before releasing assets or registering transfers.
Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 historically provided that no right as executor or legatee could be established in any court unless a court of competent jurisdiction in India had granted probate of the will, or had granted letters of administration with the will annexed, under which the right was claimed. The provision applied to wills made by certain categories of testators and had practical force primarily in the Presidency towns (Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai) and for communities governed by Part IX of the Act.
The Repealing & Amending Act, 2025, the periodic legislative housekeeping exercise that removes obsolete or spent provisions, included Section 213 among the provisions omitted from the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The Act also made a consequential substitution in Section 370 of the Indian Succession Act to reflect this deletion.
| Date / Instrument | What Happened | Legal Effect |
|---|---|---|
| 1925, Indian Succession Act enacted | Section 213 imposed mandatory probate requirement for establishing executor/legatee rights in court for specified wills | Courts, banks and registries relied on probate as the standard evidence of testamentary authority |
| 2025, Repealing & Amending Act, 2025 (Act No. 37 of 2025) passed | Section 213 omitted; Section 370 substituted consequentially | No statutory mandate for probate under this provision; executor may assert rights without prior court grant in many cases |
| 2026, Act effective / published in Gazette of India | Operational effect begins; banks, registries and practitioners must adapt procedures | Practical compliance gap: institutions developing internal policies to handle non-probate evidence bundles |
| Obligation / Issue | Pre-2026 (Section 213 in Force) | Post-2026 (Section 213 Repealed) |
|---|---|---|
| Probate requirement | Probate often required under Section 213 for specified communities and to establish executor/legatee title in court | No mandatory probate under Section 213, executors can act directly in many cases; registries and banks may still demand evidence |
| Evidence accepted by banks/registries | Probate or letters of administration commonly required before title transfer or asset release | Banks may accept executor affidavit + attested will + death certificate + indemnity bond, practice varies by institution and state |
| Court involvement for clear title | Courts routinely used to establish title through probate proceedings | Court route remains available and advisable for contested cases, conservative registries, and complex immovable property transfers |
Industry observers expect the operational adjustment period to last well into 2027, as individual banks, state sub-registrar offices and NSDL/CDSL develop standardised documentary requirements that replace the probate-as-default approach.
The repeal alters the starting assumption for wills & estates lawyers India practitioners advise on: an executor named in a valid will can now, in principle, approach banks, registries and other custodians directly. The executor’s authority derives from the will itself, a position that was always the theoretical legal position but was, in practice, overridden by Section 213’s court-grant requirement.
That said, third-party gatekeepers introduce friction. Banks are risk-averse institutions. Sub-registrar offices follow state-level registration rules. Depositories have their own participant regulations. None of these entities are obliged to accept an executor’s claim at face value simply because Section 213 has been repealed.
Even though Section 213 no longer mandates probate, it remains the most authoritative evidence of testamentary title. The practical question for executors and heirs is whether the cost and delay of probate proceedings are justified by the estate’s composition, the number of potential claimants, and the receptiveness of relevant third parties.
Decision rule: If the answer to two or more of these questions is “yes,” the likely practical effect will be that obtaining probate or letters of administration saves more time and cost downstream than it adds upfront.
For executors and heirs proceeding without probate, the evidence bundle presented to banks and registries must be comprehensive enough to satisfy institutional risk departments. The following documents form the core “non-probate evidence package” that wills & estates lawyers India specialists typically recommend:
Registration of immovable property transfers is governed by state-level registration departments. There is no uniform national rule on whether a sub-registrar will accept executor documents without probate. In practice, evolving banking and registry rules in India mean that executors should confirm requirements with the specific sub-registrar office before scheduling a transfer.
Transmission of securities held in demat form is processed through the depository participant (DP). Participants follow NSDL/CDSL operating instructions, which have historically listed probate or letters of administration among the required documents for transmission to a legal heir. Executors should contact the DP directly, citing the Section 213 repeal, and confirm whether updated transmission guidelines have been issued. Where the DP insists on a court order, a succession certificate from a civil court may be an alternative to full probate proceedings.
The Section 213 repeal does not alter any provision of the Income-tax Act, 1961. When inherited immovable property is sold, both the buyer and the selling heir face specific tax obligations that must be fulfilled regardless of whether probate was obtained.
Under Section 194-IA of the Income-tax Act, any buyer of immovable property (other than agricultural land) must deduct tax at source at the rate of 1% of the total consideration if the sale consideration is Rs 50 lakh or more. This obligation falls on the buyer, not the seller. The buyer must:
Buyers should note: the obligation under Section 194-IA applies whether the seller inherited the property or purchased it. The inheritance itself is not a taxable event, no withholding tax in India arises at the point of succession. Tax crystallises only upon a subsequent transfer or sale.
When an heir sells inherited property, capital gains are computed using the original cost of acquisition to the deceased (not the market value at the date of death). The holding period for determining whether gains are long-term or short-term is also counted from the date the deceased originally acquired the property.
| Item | Amount (Rs) |
|---|---|
| Sale consideration received by heir | 1,20,00,000 |
| Original cost of acquisition to deceased (pre-2001; FMV adopted as on 01-Apr-2001) | 10,00,000 |
| Cost Inflation Index, year of acquisition (2001-02): 100; year of sale (2025-26): 349 | , |
| Indexed cost of acquisition (10,00,000 × 349 ÷ 100) | 34,90,000 |
| Long-term capital gains (1,20,00,000 − 34,90,000) | 85,10,000 |
| Buyer’s TDS deducted (1% of Rs 1,20,00,000) | 1,20,000 |
The heir claims the TDS of Rs 1,20,000 as a credit against the final tax liability when filing the return of income. If the heir qualifies for a reinvestment exemption (e.g., purchase of a new residential property under Section 54), the taxable capital gains reduce accordingly.
For NRI heirs and Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs), the Section 213 repeal simplifies one step, they may not need to obtain probate before dealing with inherited assets. However, the more complex layer of NRI inheritance repatriation compliance under FEMA and RBI regulations remains entirely unaffected. Wills & estates lawyers India specialists frequently encounter NRI clients who assume that inheriting property or funds is the hardest part. In practice, the repatriation of sale proceeds is where the regulatory complexity lies.
Under RBI’s FEMA framework, an NRI or PIO may repatriate funds from an NRO (Non-Resident Ordinary) account, subject to an annual ceiling of USD 1 million per financial year. Repatriation of sale proceeds of immovable property acquired by way of inheritance is permitted, subject to conditions specified in the applicable FEMA notifications. The key procedural requirements are:
| Step | Detail |
|---|---|
| Property sale price | Rs 1,50,00,000 (approx. USD 178,000 at illustrative exchange rate) |
| Buyer deducts TDS (1% under Section 194-IA) | Rs 1,50,000 |
| Net proceeds credited to NRO account | Rs 1,48,50,000 |
| Capital gains tax paid by NRI heir (after indexation) | As computed; advance tax or self-assessment deposited |
| CA issues certificate confirming tax compliance | Form 15CB filed; Form 15CA submitted online |
| AD bank processes remittance from NRO | Within USD 1 million annual limit, remitted to overseas bank or NRE account |
NRIs with assets in India and abroad often execute separate wills for each jurisdiction, an “Indian will” covering Indian assets and a foreign will covering overseas assets. This practice avoids the need for cross-border probate and ensures each will is drafted in compliance with local formal requirements. The key consideration is that neither will should inadvertently revoke the other; each should expressly state that it applies only to assets in the specified jurisdiction.
FEMA compliance for heirs involves understanding the distinction between NRO and NRE accounts. Funds in an NRO account are freely repatriable up to the USD 1 million annual ceiling (subject to tax compliance), whereas NRE account balances are fully and freely repatriable without limit. The strategic step is therefore to transfer eligible amounts from NRO to NRE (after tax clearance and CA certification), from where the heir can remit overseas without further restriction.
The repeal of Section 213 does not eliminate probate, it eliminates the statutory mandate for probate. Courts remain available, and in several scenarios the court route is not just advisable but practically unavoidable.
Timelines vary significantly by state and court workload. Uncontested probate in metropolitan High Courts typically takes three to nine months. Contested proceedings can extend to several years.
Whether you are an executor, an heir or an NRI beneficiary, the following checklist consolidates the action items from this guide:
The omission of Section 213 by the Repealing & Amending Act, 2025 represents the most significant procedural shift in Indian succession practice in decades. For wills & estates lawyers India practitioners, the change creates both opportunity and risk: opportunity, because many estates can now be administered faster and at lower cost; risk, because the absence of a uniform replacement standard means executors face inconsistent demands from banks, registries and depositories across states. The safest course for high-value, multi-asset or cross-border estates remains obtaining probate or letters of administration, treating the court grant as premium insurance against third-party refusals and future disputes.
For simpler estates, the non-probate evidence bundle, executor affidavit, original will, death certificate, indemnity bond, will increasingly suffice, provided the executor is methodical in documentation and proactive in confirming each institution’s requirements. Tax and FEMA obligations remain unchanged and non-negotiable: buyers must deduct TDS under Section 194-IA, heirs must compute and pay capital gains, and NRIs must comply with RBI repatriation procedures. Specialist legal advice tailored to the specific estate composition and jurisdictional requirements is essential.
This article was produced by Global Law Experts. For specialist advice on this topic, contact Anil Harish at D.M. Harish & Co. LLP, Advocates, a member of the Global Law Experts network.
posted 23 minutes ago
posted 33 minutes ago
posted 37 minutes ago
posted 4 hours ago
posted 5 hours ago
posted 5 hours ago
posted 7 hours ago
posted 7 hours ago
posted 8 hours ago
posted 8 hours ago
posted 9 hours ago
posted 9 hours ago
No results available
Find the right Legal Expert for your business
Send welcome message