← All Phrases

“Section 22(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 22Section 22(1)193 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 22(1) is Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai (84 Taxmann.com 51), cited in 263 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 22(1)

Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai
84 Taxmann.com 51 · 2017 · ITAT
263
citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot be deleted merely due to technical defects in the penalty notice, such as not ticking the specific default, if the assessee understood the charges.

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.

Mysore Minerals Ltd. v. CIT
239 ITR 775 · 1999 · Supreme Court
215
citing judgments

For income tax purposes, the 'owner' of a property is the person who is entitled to receive income in their own right, bears the risks incidental to ownership, and utilizes the asset, even if the sale deed is not formally registered. This beneficial ownership is sufficient for claiming depreciation or capital gains exemption under relevant sections.

Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. v. CIT
263 ITR 143 · 2003 · Supreme Court
181
citing judgments

Income derived from letting out property along with incidental use of furniture, fixtures, and common facilities is assessable as 'income from house property' and not 'business income' when the prime object is merely to let out and not to exploit the property as a business asset.

Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT
266 ITR 99 · 2004 · Supreme Court
181
citing judgments

The Revenue cannot take a conflicting stand from what it had earlier accepted in a previous assessment year without compelling justification. This principle of consistency applies to various issues, including the treatment of customs duty in closing inventory.

Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT
244 ITR 734 · 2000 · High Court
168
citing judgments

The Revenue is bound by the rule of consistency and cannot adopt a divergent position in a subsequent assessment year unless there is a change in facts or law.

DCIT v. Core Health Care Ltd.
298 ITR 194 · 2008 · Supreme Court
165
citing judgments

Interest expenditure incurred for acquiring capital assets, even if capitalized in the books, is deductible if for the purpose of business. Section 36(1)(iii) is a self-contained code regarding such deductions.

CIT v. Tip Top Typography
368 ITR 330 · 2014 · High Court
161
citing judgments

For computing income from house property, the Annual Letting Value (ALV) cannot be arbitrarily estimated by the Assessing Officer, but must be determined based on the Municipal ratable value of the property.

Judgments citing Section 22(1)

Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 19(1), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 4421/DEL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahayrenew Wind Energy (Shivpur) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, 138, Ansal Income Tax, Circle 19(1) Delhi Chambers, Bhikaji Cama Palace, Range Code-44, C. R. New Delhi Building, I. P. Estate, Pan: Aafcr4810H New Delhi Appellant Respondent Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited,138, Ansal Income Tax, Circle 19(1) Delhi Chambers, Bhikajicama Palace, Range Code-44, C. R. New Delhi Building, I. P. Estate, Pan: Aafcr4553H New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Kashish Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 27/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Renew Wind Energy (Shivpur) Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 19(1), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 4238/DEL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahayrenew Wind Energy (Shivpur) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, 138, Ansal Income Tax, Circle 19(1) Delhi Chambers, Bhikaji Cama Palace, Range Code-44, C. R. New Delhi Building, I. P. Estate, Pan: Aafcr4810H New Delhi Appellant Respondent Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited,138, Ansal Income Tax, Circle 19(1) Delhi Chambers, Bhikajicama Palace, Range Code-44, C. R. New Delhi Building, I. P. Estate, Pan: Aafcr4553H New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Kashish Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 27/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 13(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 3953/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwaljohnson Matthey India P. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. Luthra & Luthra Law Income Tax, Circle 13(2) Office India, 103, Ashoka Estate, Spm Civic Centre, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaacj2919A Appellant Respondent Johnson Matthey India P. Ltd. Vs National Faceless Appeal 5Th Floor, C/O Regus Business Centre, Income Tax Center, Gurgaon, Road, South Department West Delhi Pan: Aaacj2919A Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sumit Mangal, Adv, Ms. Radhika Sharma, Adv& Ms. Soumya Pandey, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant- company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Johnson Matthey India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-13(2), New Delhi

ITA 2564/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

1ITA Nos. 2564 & 3953/del/2024 Johnson Matthey India P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH

Vatika Seven Elements Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1525/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2018-19]

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Itron India P.Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1235/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalitron India P. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Flat No. 507, Income Tax, Circle 10(1), Bhikajicamabhawan, C. R. Building, New Delhi Bhikajicama Place, New Delhi Pan: Aabcs6575L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh.Kashish Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Ls Cable India P.Ltd., Rewari vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-5, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 4665/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant- company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Ls Cable India Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1961/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant- company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Honda Trading Asia Company Limited, Thailand vs. DCIT, Int. Taxation, Noida

ITA 4936/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 158A

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Msd Pharmaceuticals Private Limited, New Delhi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 16(1), New Delhi

ITA 4571/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

1 ITA Nos. 530, 2330 & 4571/Del/2024 MSD Pharmaceuticals (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI

Bentley Systems India Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 4(2), Delhi Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4465/DEL/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalbentley Systems India Private V Deputy Commissioner Of Limited. Work Well Suites, 10 Floor, S Income Tax, Circle 4(2), C. Max House, 1516/338,339 340 R. Building, Assessment Village Behapur Adjacent Okhla Unit, Income Tax Railway Station, Okhla Industrial Department, Delhi Estate, S.O. Tehkhand, South East Delhi, Delhi, 110020 Pan: Aabcb5645E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Nishank Vashistha, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Baxter India Private Limited, Gurgaon, Haryana vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

ITA 4413/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant- company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Vivo Mobile India Private Limited, Haryana, India vs. Assistance Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 4408/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant- company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Ts Tech Sun India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4391/DEL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalts Tech Sun India Private Vs The Assistant Commissioner Limited, A-47, Lower Ground Of Income Tax, Circle 25(1), C. Floor, Hauz Khas, New Delhi- R. Building, I. P. Estate, 110016 Delhi-110002, New Delhi Pan: Aaact4324M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Ankit Sahni, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Jubilant Generics Limited, Gautam Buddha Nagar vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4316/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwaljubilant Generics Limited Vs Assessment Unit, Income Tax Plot 1A, Sector-16A Noida H. O. Department, Gautam Buddha Nagar, 201301, Delhi Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aadcj2401L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Ms. Nidhi, Ar (Virutal) Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 158A

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Toyo Ink India Private Limited, Delhi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4299/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwaltoyo Ink India Private Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of C-151, Naraina Industrial Area, Income Tax, Circle 25(1), Phase-1, Naraina Industrial Range 46, C. R. Building, Estate, South West, Delhi- Delhi-110002, Delhi 110028Pan: Aacct5137A Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Ankitsahni, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Honda Access India Private Limited, Noida, Uttar Pradesh vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Gb Nagar, Noida, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4251/DEL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalhonda Access India Private Vs Assessment Unit, Income Limited Plot No. 1-D/5, Tax Department, Circle Udyogvihar, Ecotech-Ii, Alpha 5(1)(1), G B Nagar, Nodia, Greater Noida, Gautam Uttar Pradesh Buddha Nagar, 201308, Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aacch9695K Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Nishank Vashistha, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Samsung Data Systems India Private Limited, Gurugram vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

ITA 3884/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

1 ITA No. 3884/Del/2024 Samsung Data Systems India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI

Adidas India Marketing Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3858/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwaladidas India Marketing Private Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Limited. Office No. 6, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax, Circle 1(1), C. R. Sector B Pocket No. 7 Plot No.11, Building, Delhi Vasantkunj South West Delhi Pan: Aaaca5313P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Ankit Sahni, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed

Beumer India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1599/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 154

dismissing O.S.A. No. 16 of 1991 filed by the appellant-company against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 14, 1991. Section 22(1) of the Act could not, therefore, be invoked and there was no impediment in the High Court dealing with the winding up petition filed