“Section 5(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 5Section 5(2)355 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 5(2) is 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141), cited in 706 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 5(2)

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises

298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court

706

citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.

342 ITR 169 · 2012 · High Court

658

citing judgments

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT

384 ITR 490 · 2016 · High Court

631

citing judgments

Co-operative banks are not fundamentally different from co-operative societies, entitling them to claim deductions under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, including for interest income treated as business income.

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)

315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court

363

citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

Shyam Sunder v. Ram Kumar, (2001) 8 SCC 24 (para 44); Brij Mohan Das Laxman Das v. CIT

5 SCC 482 · 1997 · Supreme Court

261

citing judgments

For income to be assessable under the head 'Income from House Property' as per Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, beneficial ownership or the right to enjoy the property is sufficient; legal ownership is not a mandatory prerequisite.

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft

310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court

259

citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

Rama Bai v. CIT

181 ITR 400 · 1990 · Supreme Court

258

citing judgments

Interest income is taxable on either an accrual or cash basis, determined by accounting principles. This method was applicable prior to legislative changes that simplified the taxation of interest income.

CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya

91 Taxmann.com 20 · 2018 · Supreme Court

205

citing judgments

Interest on enhanced compensation received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the compensation, not merely interest income, and is exigible to tax on a receipt basis.

Judgments citing Section 5(2)

Dariyav Singh, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Meerut

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2933/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

For Appellant: None

Section 154Section 5(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Vijay Kumar Gupta, Faridabad vs. ACIT Circle-II, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1720/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Vijay Kumar Gupta, Vs Acit, 304 Ssr Corporate Park, Circle-Ii, Nhpc Metro Station, Faridabad, Faridabad. Haryana-121003. Pan-Aaqpg5692J Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vijay Kumar Singla, Ca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26.07.2023 Order

Section 271(1)(c)Section 3Section 4Section 5Section 5(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2011

We Are Voices Entertainment Inc, Gurgaon vs. DCIT International Taxation 3(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1474/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 234ASection 270A

received by the assessee company is analyzed as under: Taxation of consideration under Income-tax Act: Under the scope of source rule under section 5(2) of the Income-tax Act, the taxable income of the non-resident constitutes income that accrues or arises or is received in India ... recognized basis of determining the place where the income arises. Therefore, the income of the assessee company is taxable under first clause of section 5(2) of the income-tax Act being income arises in India. Accordingly, the test of taxability under deeming provisions under section 9 is unwarranted. Taxation

Planetcast International Pte.Ltd, Singapure vs. ACIT, Circle1(1)(1) International Taxation, Delhi

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1832/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Vizaya Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

occasion to consider a similar grievance and held as under: “It is clear from the reading of section 5(2) that a non-resident is liable to pay tax on the income derived by him, which is received or deemed to be received in India or which accrues or arises

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Star Cruise Management Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1296/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2016-2017

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant

Section 144Section 144C(3)Section 5(2)(a)Section 9(1)(i)

subject to remittance of the income of the assessee from India and the case of the assessee is, therefore, squarely covered by section 5(2)(a) of the IT Act, 1961? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, Assessment Year ... operations were carried out by the Assessee in India; and therefore, no income was liable to tax in India in terms of Section 5(2) and Section 9(1)(i) of the Act. 10.2. We note that the Assessee has also placed on record decisions of the Tribunal dismissing

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Star Cruise Management Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1295/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2017-2018

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant

Section 144Section 144C(3)Section 5(2)(a)Section 9(1)(i)

Tara Raju Patel, Valsad vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Surat

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 195/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Raju Maganlal Patel, I.T.O. C/O-Dinkarbhai T. Patel, Shankar (International Taxation), Vs. Talao, Via-Dungri, Valsad. Surat. Pan No. Auspp 1436 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Tara Raju Patel, I.T.O. C/O-Dinkarbhai T. Patel, Shankar (International Taxation), Vs. Talao, Via-Dungri, Valsad. Surat. Pan No. Avdpp 6714 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

from Income Tax Act. The assessee has no other source of income in India. Section 68/69 or 69A to 69C cannot prevail over Section 5(2)(b) of the Act. The assessee submitted that in absence of any income by NRI, no addition can be made. The agriculture income

Shri Raju Maganlal Patel, Valsad vs. Income Tax Officer, Int. Taxation, Surat

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 188/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

Shri Suresh George, Alappuzha vs. The ADIT International Taxation, Thiruvananthapuram-3, Thiruvanathapuram

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 794/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Jun 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkeysuresh George Asstt. Director Of Income Tax Kurichyiel House International Taxation Payippad, Harippad Vs. Thiruvananthapuram Alappuzha 690 556 [Pan:Affpg5853B]

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Verma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 192Section 194JSection 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

without doubt, received in India, so that it is taxable in India in view of section 5(2)(a) of the Act, adverted to both by the AO and the ld. CIT(A), and even otherwise a part of the well-settled law (Raghav Reddi ... seafarer into the NRE bank account maintained in India by the seafarer. 2. The matter has been examined in the Board. Section 5(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act provides that only such income of a non-resident shall be subjected to tax in India that is either received

Qualcomm Incorporated, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1)(1), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7559/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Percy J. Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

hands of the Assessee in India, has to be examined with reference to the provisions of section 9(0(4(c) read with section 5(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.with section 5(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Para-11.8 Section 9(l)(vi)(c) raises

Qualcomm Incorporated, Usa vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1)(1), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7894/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Percy J. Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

Vijayakumar Kanaiyalal Matta, Mumbai vs. ITO 26 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 53/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhvk-Vk-La- 52@Eaqcbz@2020 ¼Fu-Oa- 2013&14½ Vk-Vk-La- 53@Eaqcbz@2020 ¼Fu-Oa- 2014&15½ Vijaykumar Kanaiyalal Matta 8/B/104, 10Th Floor, S. S. Nagar, Sion Koliwada, Sion Mumbai-400 037 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aropm6060D Cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer – 26(3) (4) Room No.507, 5Th Floor, Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, B. K. C. Bandra (E), ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 051

For Appellant: Shri Tejveer Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, Sr. AR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 69

money in cash. Thus, the only source of payment of on-money, if any, are the funds from Muscat. Under the provisions of section 5(2) of the Act, income of previous year of a person who is a non-resident is taxable in India if the source of income

Vijayakumar Kanaiyalal Matta, Mumbai vs. ITO 26 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 52/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tejveer Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, Sr. AR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 69

Sis Live, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2146/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Sis Live, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 4Th Floor, Statesman House Income Tax, Building, Barakhamba Road, Circle-3(1)(2), International Connaught Place, Taxation, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Abrfs4787L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 9

Nos.2145 & 2146/Del/2022 AY: 2018-19 & 2019-20 such expenditure against the interest income earned from SIS Holdings and ultimately claimed loss. Referring to section 5(2) and section 9(1)(i) of the Act, the Assessing Officer held, since, the assessee had no business activity or operation in India ... income was also received outside India. Therefore, it cannot be said to have been received or deemed to be received in India under section 5(2)(1) of the Act. More so, when the interest income has no nexus with India. He submitted, once the interest income does not accrue

Sis Live, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2145/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 9

Board of Control for Cricket in India, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5493/MUM/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma

Section 195Section 248Section 253

Control for Cricket in India ITA no.5492/Mum./2017 ITA no.5493/Mum./2017 decide the taxability in the hands of a non-resident assessee. Section 5(2) of the Act provides that the total income of a person who is non-resident includes all income from whatever source derived, which ... case of the Revenue that compensation for the termination of the CLT20 Tournament was received in India, therefore clause (a) of section 5(2) of the Act has no application in the present case. As regards clause (b) of section 5(2) of the Act, section 9 elaborates

Board of Control for Cricket in India, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5492/MUM/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma

Section 195Section 248Section 253

Chitra Jain, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 26/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani(CA) &For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

Form No. 3. The appellant has been issued Form No. 5 (Order for full and final settlement of tax arrears under section 5(2) read with section 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (3 of 2020) the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Rules, 2020) on 13/10/2021 ... been issued by the Designated Authority on 19/01/2021. Hence, in view of the provisions of Section 4(2) read with Section 5(2) of DTVSV, 2020 this appeal is deemed to have been withdrawn on 27/02/2021.” 5 Chitra Jain vs. ITO 5. The assessee has also preferred an appeal against

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Marriott International Design & Construction Services Inc., Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is thus dismissed

ITA 2977/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit (It) – 3(2)(1) V. M/S. Marriott International Design Room No. 1632, 16Th Floor & Construction Services Inc., Air India Building, Nariman Point C/O. Marriot Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai – 400 021 303A, 304, Fulcrum B-Wing, Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai, Sahar Road Andheri (E) - 400099 Pan: Aagcm5401Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 01/Mum/2023 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 2977/Mum/2022 (A.Y: 2018-19)] M/S. Marriott International Design V. Dcit (It) – 3(2)(1) & Construction Services Inc., Room No. 1632, 16Th Floor C/O. Marriot Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., Air India Building 303A, 304, Fulcrum Nariman Point B-Wing, Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai, Sahar Road Andheri (E) - 400099 Pan: Aagcm5401Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Paras Savla Department Represented By : Shri Kunal Haver

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C

income with the foreign company had received in India or an income which had accrued to the foreign company within the meaning of section 5(2) of the Act and that the sum paid to the foreign company at London for technical advice given from London could not be attributed

Tata Nyk Shipping Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. CIT International Taxation-3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1067/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tata Nyk Shipping Pte. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., International Taxation-3, 6, Shenton Way, #18-08B, New Delhi Oue Downtown 2, Singapore Pan :Aadct9945P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 263Section 92C

available, the receipts of the assessee have to be taxed under the Income Tax Act by applying the source rule as per section 5(2) read with section 9 of the Act. Having held so, he proceeded to determine the nature of income at the hands of the assessee