← All Phrases

“Section 2(1)(5)(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(1)(5)(4)1 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 2(1)(5)(4) is Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (384 ITR 490), cited in 631 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 2(1)(5)(4)

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. Visakhapatnam Port Trust
144 ITR 146 · 1983 · High Court
124
citing judgments

Sections 4 and 5 of the Income Tax Act, which define total income and chargeability, are subject to Section 90, meaning that Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) override the Act's provisions in case of a conflict.

Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India
5 SCC 536 · 1997 · Reported
93
citing judgments

Tax can only be levied or collected by authority of law, as mandated by Article 265 of the Constitution; consequently, any tax collected contrary to law must be refunded.

Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nizam's Suppl. Religious Endowment Trust
127 ITR 378 · 1981 · High Court
87
citing judgments

Income of a charitable trust, other than from a business undertaking covered by Section 11(4), is determined based on its books of account. Payments of income tax and wealth tax by the trust are considered an application of income for charitable purposes under Section 11.

Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax
26 ITR 765 · 1954 · Supreme Court
64
citing judgments

The definition of 'business' is of wide import, encompassing any trade, commerce, manufacture, or adventure in the nature of trade. Even a single and isolated transaction can constitute an 'adventure in the nature of trade' if it bears the clear indicia of trade, and no fixed formula can be evolved to determine the character of such isolated transactions.

Mani Mandir Sewa Nyas Samiti Ramghat Ayodhya v. CIT
119 Taxmann.com 383 · 2020 · Supreme Court
45
citing judgments

The Supreme Court dismisses appeals seeking condonation of excessive delay in filing, especially when the reasons provided for the delay, such as attributing it to an employee, are not found to be sufficient or convincing.

JT 2001(2) SC 642 and in BANK OF INDIA v. KETHAN PAREKH
8 SCC 148 · 2012 · Reported
45
citing judgments

When two special acts conflict, the later act generally prevails, unless the dominant purpose of the earlier act is covered by the contingency in question, in which case the earlier act may prevail.

Upper India Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
117 ITR 569 · 1979 · Supreme Court
37
citing judgments

Expenditure or payments to related persons cannot be disallowed under Section 40A(2)(b) unless the Assessing Officer first establishes that the expenditure is excessive or unreasonable. The onus is on the revenue to prove such unreasonableness.

Judgments citing Section 2(1)(5)(4)

Deputy Commssioner of Income Tax (Central Circle) -3(3), Mumbai vs. Excel Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6469/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6469/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Deputy Commissioner V/S. Excel Entertainment Pvt Of Income Tax बनाम Ltd. (Central Circle)-3(3) 404, Kautilya Bhawan, Bkc, Mumbai 400051 Shubham 701, Orchid Pride, Convent Avenue Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai 40054 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace5273A Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Joshi A/W Shri Anurag Tulsian & Shri Vipul Mody राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 08.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Renu Jauhri [A.M.] :- This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Appeal) 51, Mumbai [Cit(A)] Dated 15.10.2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act”] For Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal. "1. "On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld Citia) Is Not Justified In Holding That Assessee Is Eligible To Claim Concessional Rate Of Tax U/S.115Baa Of The Page 2

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/w Shri Anurag Tulsian & Shri Vipul ModyFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR DR
Section 115Section 115BSection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

1)(8) read with section Page 4 ITA No. 6469/Mum/2024 AY 2020-21 Excel Entertainment pvt ltd. 2013(5)(0) of TOLA), Section 2(1)(5)(4) provides that the Income-tax Act, 1961 is one of the "specified Acts" under the TOLA, and section 3 (1)(b) of TOLA