How many judgments cite CIT v. Chugandas and Co.?

83 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Chugandas and Co. (55 ITR 17), spanning 2005 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Chugandas and Co. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 10(3), Section 132, Section 14, Section 153A, Section 153C.

CIT v. Chugandas and Co.

55 ITR 17Supreme Court of India1965#1385 most cited

What is CIT v. Chugandas and Co. authority for?

When a taxpayer's sole source of income is from the letting out of properties, such rental income is to be assessed under the head 'Income from House Property'.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Chugandas and Co. · 55 ITR 17 · rental income classification · Income from House Property · Profits and Gains of Business or Profession · Section 24(a) · sole source of income · letting out properties income tax · head of income · business income vs house property income

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 10(3)Section 132 Section 14 Section 153A Section 153C Section 45 Section 48

Issues it is cited on

section 55(2)section 46 section 49 section 24(a)interest on securities doctrine of merger section 55 annual value transfer of capital asset colourable device profits and gains of business or profession section 48

Judgments citing CIT v. Chugandas and Co.

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3398/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

…in appeal\nthat it was forced to let out unsold properties. Rather, letting out was its main\nbusiness and the properties were constructed by it with the main motto of\nletting out and earning rental income.\n4.11\nThe decision of CIT vs Chugandas& Co. [1965] 55 ITR 17 (SC) as\nrelied by the appellant is also not relevant in the present case as in that case\nPage 9\nITA No. 3395, 3396, 3397, 3398/Mum/2024\nΑ.Υ. 2012-13, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18\nArihant Developers, Mumbai\nrental income was the only source of income. However, in the present case,\nrental income is not the only source of income.\n4.12 On the basi…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3397/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

…in appeal\nthat it was forced to let out unsold properties. Rather, letting out was its main\nbusiness and the properties were constructed by it with the main motto of\nletting out and earning rental income.\n4.11 The decision of CIT vs Chugandas& Co. [1965] 55 ITR 17 (SC) as\nrelied by the appellant is also not relevant in the present case as in that case\nrental income was the only source of income. However, in the present case,\nrental income is not the only source of income.\n4.12 On the basis of above mentioned facts and judicial pronouncements, it is\nclear that rent received from letting out of properties…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3396/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

…in appeal\nthat it was forced to let out unsold properties. Rather, letting out was its main\nbusiness and the properties were constructed by it with the main motto of\nletting out and earning rental income.\n4.11 The decision of CIT vs Chugandas& Co. [1965] 55 ITR 17 (SC) as\nrelied by the appellant is also not relevant in the present case as in that case\nrental income was the only source of income. However, in the present case,\nrental income is not the only source of income.\n4.12 On the basis of above mentioned facts and judicial pronouncements, it is\nclear that rent received from letting out of properties…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1 , KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3395/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

…in appeal\nthat it was forced to let out unsold properties. Rather, letting out was its main\nbusiness and the properties were constructed by it with the main motto of\nletting out and earning rental income.\n4.11 The decision of CIT vs Chugandas& Co. [1965] 55 ITR 17 (SC) as\nrelied by the appellant is also not relevant in the present case as in that case\nrental income was the only source of income. However, in the present case,\nrental income is not the only source of income.\n4.12 On the basis of above mentioned facts and judicial pronouncements, it is\nclear that rent received from letting out of properties…

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 212/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…nt Trust Ltd. v. CIT (1961) (42 ITR 49) that if the income from a source falls within a specific head, the fact that it may indirectly be covered by another head will not make the income taxable under the latter head. (See also CIT v. Chugandas and Co. (1965) 55 ITR 17 (SC). 11 ITA Nos.207/Coch/2019 & Ors. Reena Jose & Ors. (14) Section 14 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as it stood at the relevant time similarly provided that "all income shall for the purposes of charge of income tax and computation of total income be classified under six heads of income," namely:- A. Salaries; B. Interest on Securities; C. Income…

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 211/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 209/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 208/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

MRS.REENA JOSE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 207/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are dismissed

C.A. No.-003291-003294 - 2009Supreme Court16 Oct 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

Section 18Section 19Section 20Section 21

…2024 INSC 781 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 32913294 OF 2009 Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. … Appellant versus Commissioner of Income Tax … Respondent with Civil Appeal Nos.1120011201 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 14451446 of 2021) Civil Appeal No.11202 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 4843 of 2020) Civil Appeal No.11203 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 7055 of 2021) Civil Appeal No.11204 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 7404 of 2021) Civil Appeal No.11205 of 2024 (Arising out o…

M/S ACTIVE SECURITIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 2335/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Puneet Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 24

…f income; they are all specific and deal with the various heads in which an item of income, profits and gains of an assessee falls. specifically under one head it has to be charged under that head and no other." 12. Likewise, in CIT v. Chugandas & Co. [1965] 55 ITR 17 (SC) it was held that business income was broken up under different heads under the Income-tax Act only for the purpose of computation of the total income and by that break up the income did not cease to be the income of the business. Therefore, the court observed that: "The heads described in Section 6 and further elaborated for the purpose of co…