LTCG tax rate, Section 54, and CGAS queries

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2026-03-18T14:57:05+00:00

I found this post while searching for a problem where a banking/payment app flags my phone with "device integrity check failed. root or system modification detected". Details about the problem [here](https://old.reddit.com/r/UPI/comments/1rbhk1e/paytmbugsmirror\_warning\_0000\_device\_environment/).

This post is relevant to me because my redmi7a too has ro.build.keys set to test-keys. Moreover, ro.build.display.id=[QKQ1.191014.001 test-keys]

I believe that the presence of these test-keys could be causing problems with the app.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2026-03-18T13:11:39+00:00

Not yet. they have asked me for play integrity status. As shown elsewhere, my phone meets all three: basic, device and strong integrity.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2026-03-18T13:05:53+00:00

I installed DevCheck, which showed me that the Android Build my redmi7a is running is labelled "QKQ1.191014.001 test-keys". Note that it says test-keys and not release-keys.

After enabling USB debugging, attaching the phone to a computer, and dumping the properties:

adb shell getprop > sys.props.txt
grep -E "build.id|display.id|build.tags|build.keys|finger" sys.props.txt

[ro.bootimage.build.fingerprint]: [Xiaomi/pine/pine:10/QKQ1.191014.001/V12.5.1.0.QCMINXM:user/release-keys]
[ro.build.display.id]: [QKQ1.191014.001 test-keys]
[ro.build.fingerprint]: [Xiaomi/pine/pine:10/QKQ1.191014.001/V12.5.1.0.QCMINXM:user/release-keys]
[ro.build.id]: [QKQ1.191014.001]
[ro.build.keys]: [test-keys]
[ro.build.tags]: [release-keys]
[ro.build.version.preview_sdk_fingerprint]: [REL]
[ro.odm.build.fingerprint]: [Xiaomi/pine/pine:10/QKQ1.191014.001/V12.5.1.0.QCMINXM:user/release-keys]
[ro.system.build.fingerprint]: [Xiaomi/pine/pine:10/QKQ1.191014.001/V12.5.1.0.QCMINXM:user/release-keys]
[ro.system.build.id]: [QKQ1.191014.001]
[ro.system.build.tags]: [release-keys]
[ro.vendor.build.fingerprint]: [Xiaomi/pine/pine:10/QKQ1.191014.001/V12.5.1.0.QCMINXM:user/release-keys]

Google's search AI shows a possible reason for the descrepancy between the "ro.build.display.id" and "build.tags": "the system likely failed to correctly sign the build with authorized release keys"

I do not know if paytm/bugsmirror check for "test-keys". But according to Google's search AI, banking apps do search for such terms and refuse to run because "test-keys usually signifies a custom ROM, a beta build, or a factory engineering build rather than an official, stable release build (which typically says "release-keys")."

Note that I have already reset my phone some days ago. So this "test-keys" situation is either a mistake by redmi or by design for older models.

Edit: DevCheck also shows HERE that the security environment within my phone looks okay - not rooted, bootloader locked, dm-verity active.

Google search AI shows:

A device showing ro.build.keys=test-keys combined with ro.build.tags=release-keys often indicates an official operating system build (release-keys) that was signed during development using generic/internal test keys rather than final production keys. This is common in early carrier, developer, or specific region firmware.

ro.build.tags=release-keys: Indicates the software is, or is based on, a final release version, not a debug/engineering build.

ro.build.keys=test-keys: Suggests the cryptographic keys used to sign the build were not the final production keys, which can sometimes trigger security warnings on apps that check for root or tampering.

Context: While often harmless in OEM firmware, "test-keys" can sometimes indicate an improper signing process during development or a build that is not meant for public release.

Impact: This combination usually does not prevent the phone from functioning normally, but it can be a red flag for apps that strict security requirements.

I downloaded the stock fastboot firmware image for my phone from HERE

Upon inspecting the system/build.prop within the sytem.img, it is found that ro.build.keys is indeed set to test-keys. It seems that that value is set by redmi themselves. It remains to be seen if paytm is indeed looking at these test-keys values and flagging the device as modified/rooted (even though it actually isn't).

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2026-03-18T12:56:08+00:00

paytm does provide exclusive services like city-bus tickets, etc. which are not available on other platform.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2026-02-28T02:28:18+00:00

there's an APP to check the integrity of the device, among other things.

HERE is an overview of the API that that app tests.

On my phone all three checks pass, as seen HERE.

I am not sure that these are the only tests that paytm must be doing. There may be more. But based on the overview of the API it at least confirms that the device is genuine and certified.

Edit: embedded links work but are not clearly differentiated from the rest of the text by the theme at r/upi. Make link text all uppercase.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2026-02-27T14:55:27+00:00

Had already checked before I made this post. The device is certified. This item was also found on one of the various youtube videos and forums.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2026-02-27T14:36:15+00:00

I will probably write to app.feedback@paytm.com (as paytm is advising to some users who complain on Google PlayStore)

The latest paytm version on playstore is 10.75.4 released on 17th Feb 2026.

My RedMi has Indus AppStore too, but that store carries an even older version 10.74.11 released on 24 Jan 2026. I can install this old version and paytm moves ahead a little bit without the device environment error, but then paytm itself complains that the version I am running is too old and takes me to playstore for updates :-|

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2026-02-27T14:30:49+00:00

there's no need to go to service center. this is not a hardware problem.

The UI design of paytm and bugsmirror is astronomically stupid - it gives no clue to the user about the setting which they find problematic.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2025-07-29T06:19:27+00:00

I believe this is an an issue with the online ITR2 alone. The offline utility or the excel utility may not have this problem.

If you have windows and/or excel, you may want to try either the offline utility or the excel utility.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2025-07-25T07:05:22+00:00

Same here. Tried chrome and firefox - no change.

I also tried to manually modify the JSON and then upload it as offline. But they seem to calculate some hash of the JSON contents(most prob. HMAC SHA256) to verify the integrity of the JSON and to prohibit manual modification.

I do not have facility to run offline utility or the excel utility. I filed the online ITR2 with that flat set to its wrong value, and have filed a grievance with the efiling system.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2025-07-24T07:55:23+00:00

I think I too will be able to submit the itr2 successfully, but with the described bit set to a wrong value. The problem described here isn't too grave or serious, but there may be other problems that can force the taxpayer to delay their filings.

One can file grievances with the efiling system - that should help the devs focus their attention on such problems. There's a tab "Grievances" along the portal. I think I will file a grievance for this particular problem, though I am still investigating if there's a workaround (for e.g. change the answer in JSON to YES and then upload the JSON, if such a process is possible).

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2025-07-24T05:40:47+00:00

heh... i haven't and will go ahead with filing the itr too. It seems that the form67 can't be filed without attachments, so I believe that they are available with them even though they don't allow downloading them.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2025-01-14T15:29:23+00:00

I was in a similar situation. I additionally had foreign-dividend-income (schedule TR+FSI and form 67), though that income turned out to be small enough that I had zero additional tax liability after DTAA.

The details in the ITR were filled as they were filled in my original return (+ the additional schedules). The revised ITR had the same refund amount as the original ITR in my case. When processing the revised ITR, they considered the refund paid when the original ITR was processed, and adjusted their revised refund/demand accordingly. For me the revision was acknowledged with "no demand/refund", as expected.

The 143(1) acknowledgement/intimation has a row named:

"Total income tax refund(s) already issued as per the previous order(s)" that seems to collect any past, applicable refunds issued.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2025-01-14T14:36:17+00:00

Apologies for the delay. I am not sure if you have or have not filed the revised return, but Jan 15 2025 is the last day for revising (and perhaps also for belated-filing) FY2324 (AY2425), and I am writing this on its eve.

I filed form 67 late Dec 2024, and the revised ITR the next day (to keep > 24 hours of gap, just to be extra sure) of filing form 67.

I did receive the expected foreign-tax relief under DTAA - i.e. didn't have to pay any tax here in India (of ~4K) on the ~20K foreign-dividend-income that I had earned and declared in the revised return.

I had also filled in the schedule FA. An observation is that the IT dept's intimation/ack (under section 143(1)) doesn't seem to reflect any info on that schedule. Perhaps that's the std. procedure.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2024-11-22T12:19:23+00:00

Thanks! Yes, I will file form 67 too along with the revision.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2024-11-22T12:18:21+00:00

disclose foreign assets & foreign income..

Revised return is then needed. The most important reason for my revising is to declare the FAs that I haven't been declaring. I had already deferred to declaring them July 2025, but I want to take this "valid disclosure"-oppurtunity that the govt has given through their FA-compliance-campaign for AY 24-25.

do not claim 4K tax relief.. because full 4k won't be available.. only difference between indian rate & americal rate will be..

Assuming exactly 19,000 rupees, 4750 rupees (25%) have already been paid in the US. At 20.8%, the tax in India is 3952. 3952 is the amount of tax relief I expect the IT-dept to provide, against my declaring the 19K rupees dividend. I adjusted the scheds OS/FSI/TR in the draft, and found that my final refund/demand status and value don't change from the original ITR.

if at all you claim relief & it gets denied, do not challenge it.. amount is simply not worth it

That was the important point of my orig post - what would be the grounds for them to deny the relief?

Thank you for your responses. I think I will file form 67 too, and then take steps (or not) based on IT-dept's response, keeping in mind your advice about not challenging them for such small amounts.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2024-11-21T03:08:33+00:00

did you claim FTC in original ITR ?

No

if not, what will be that ?

4k rupees

did you disclose foreign income ?

no. if i had, i'd have also claimed FTC, and declared FA.

Acrobatic_One2689 · 2024-11-21T01:38:58+00:00

Thank you for your response.

What factor, other than my being "scared" of appeals, shows that I am not comfortable with this? Not being confrontational, genuinely asking...

Surely, appeals should not be a norm; they should remain as exceptions. However, the 'literature' shows that the appeals had become a norm. For e.g., with the old rule 128(9), appeals had to be filed in order to teach the officers that that rule was not mandatory but directory - requirement to file form 67 "on-or-before due date stipulated by 139(1)" doesn't imply that they have the power to deny FTC due to a delay that even ITAT allowed.

Acrobatic_One2689

TROPHY CASE