“Section 5(2)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 5Section 5(2)(b)80 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 5(2)(b) is CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (310 ITR 320), cited in 259 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 5(2)(b)

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).

PCIT v. Wipro Ltd.

140 Taxmann.com 223 · 2022 · Supreme Court

192

citing judgments

Exemption provisions under Chapter III, such as Section 10B(8), must be interpreted strictly, and any claim for such exemptions must be made in the return of income. The principles governing Chapter III (incomes not forming part of total income) differ from those for Chapter VIA (deductions in computing total income).

CIT v. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages P Ltd.

331 ITR 192 · 2011 · High Court

152

citing judgments

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax cannot exercise revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer has taken one of two possible views on a debatable issue during assessment proceedings.

Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.

6 SCC 121 · 2009 · Reported

140

citing judgments

This case establishes the principles for calculating compensation in motor accident and personal injury claims, including the selection of the multiplier based on the deceased's age, assessment of loss of dependency, consideration of future prospects, and deductions for personal expenses.

CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat

364 ITR 31 · 2014 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A trust's objects, even if based on religious tenets, can qualify as charitable for tax exemptions if its benefits are not exclusively restricted to a particular religious community or caste.

DCIT v. Welspun Corporation Ltd.

77 Taxmann.com 165 · 2017 · ITAT

citing judgments

Subscription fees received by a non-resident for information access do not constitute 'royalty' for the use of copyright under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case also elaborates on the scheme of taxability for non-residents under Section 5(2) of the Act, especially concerning income deemed to accrue or arise in India.

Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association v. CIT

82 ITR 704 · 1971 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

An intention to benefit a section of the public, as distinguished from a special individual, is sufficient for a trust to be considered for charitable registration and exemptions. This applies even if the beneficiaries belong to a specific caste, community, or professional group, allowing the trust to qualify as serving a general public utility under Section 2(15).

19-23 of APB): UOI v. Hari Singh

302 CTR 458 · 2018 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Additional amounts, solatium, and interest on excess compensation under the Land Acquisition Act form part of enhanced compensation under section 45(5) and are taxable in the year of receipt. If TDS is deducted, the Assessing Officer must determine the nature of the land acquired and the taxability of the compensation or enhanced compensation.

Judgments citing Section 5(2)(b)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Rajkot vs. Aditya Birla Global Trading(India) Pvt.Ltd. (Swiss Singapore India Pvt. Ltd.), Gandhidham

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

ITA 284/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

commission payable to foreign agents could be deemed to have accrued or arose in India and, accordingly would be taxable under provisions of section 5(2)(b) read with section 9(1)(i) Whether since non-resident agents had rendered their services outside India and all agents had overseas offices

Aditya Birla Global Trading (India) Private Limited, Gujarat vs. DCIT-ACIT Cent-2 RKT, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

ITA 226/RJT/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

Aditya Birla Global Trading (India) Private Limited, Gujarat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Gandhihdam, Gandhidham, Gujarat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

ITA 225/RJT/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

Mridula Jha Jena, Mumbai vs. International Tax Ward, 3(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4844/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra/Ms. SnigdhaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 270ASection 5(2)Section 9(1)(ii)

down in the said case are squarely applicable to the facts of present case also. c) The criteria of applying the definition of Section 5(2)(b) would be such income which is earned in India for the services rendered in India and not otherwise. d) Under section

Kiri Industries Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1513/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumarshri Tr Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 234ASection 270ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

account of commission paid to overseas agents was deemed to accrue or arise in India and was accordingly taxable under the provision of section 5(2)(b) r.w.s. 9(1)(i) of the Act but the assessee has failed to make the compliances with the provisions of section 195(2

Manab Chandra Ghosh, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 1(2), It, Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 40/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.40/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Manab Chandra Ghosh………………..……………………………….…..……Appellant 5A, Banerjee Para, Behala, Kol-700060. [Pan: Ahspg9975H] Vs. Acit, Circle-1(2), It-Kolkata..........…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nageswar Rao, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Kr. Biswas, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 19, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 27, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.11.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Employee Of Ibm India Pvt. Ltd. (An Indian Company With Registered Office In Bangalore) & Was Undergone A Short-Term Assignment To Indonesia During The Relevant Assessment Year. During The Financial Year 2015-16, The Stayed 61 Days In India As Evident By The Passport Details Submitted Before The Assessing Officer. Consequently, The Assessee Claimed To Be A Non-Resident For The Assessment Year 2016-17 As Per The Provisions Of The Income Tax Act. During The Assessment Year In Question, The Assessee Received Salary Amounting To Rs.29,57,760/- In India, On Which Rs.7,06,207/- Was Deducted As Tax At Source As Per Form No.16 Filed By The Assessee. During The Relevant Assessment Year, The Assessee Also

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 5(2)Section 5(2)(b)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh

M/S Safa Enterprises, Kodungallur vs. The ACIT, Range 2, Circle 1, Thrissur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 232/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: ------- None ------For Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R

Section 195Section 195(2)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

M/S Safa Enterprises, Kodungallur vs. The ACIT, Range 2, Thrissur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 231/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: ------- None ------For Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R

Section 195Section 195(2)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

M/S Stylam Industries Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

ITA 394/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 40ASection 5(2)Section 6Section 9(1)

resident agents is deemed to accrue and arise in India, and is taxable under the Act in view of the specific provision of section 5(2)(b) read with section 9(1 )(i) of the Act. The provision of section 1 95 would apply, and the rate of tax will ... India. 10. The ld. CIT(A) has held that the aspect of income deemed to accrue or arise in India, as contained in Section 5(2)(b) of the Act has to be read alongwith the provisions of Section 9 of the Act; that read together, Sections 5

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Stylam Industries Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

ITA 389/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 40ASection 5(2)Section 6Section 9(1)

M/S Stylam Industries Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

ITA 960/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 40ASection 5(2)Section 6Section 9(1)

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Stylam Industries Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

ITA 1033/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 40ASection 5(2)Section 6Section 9(1)

Income Tax Officer, Greams Road Income Tax Office vs. K Ansari, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1358/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1357/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1358/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito Mr. K. Ansari बनाम/ #6/1, Parameshwari Nagar International Taxation Ward -1(1) Vs. 4Th Street, Adyar, Chennai-600 020. Chennai-6. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akhpa-5381-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan (Fca)-Ld.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (FCA)-Ld.AR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department Greams Road vs. K Ansari, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1357/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (FCA)-Ld.AR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

Alan Moses Mozes, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Intl. Taxn., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 542/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kapoor, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(4)(ii)Section 5(2)Section 6(1)Section 69A

channel, it could be said that onus on assessee under Section 69 stood discharged and, therefore, it was not taxable in India under Section 5(2)(b). In the case of Iqbal Ismail Virani v. ITO 128 taxmann.com 181 (Panaji - Trib.), the ITAT held that money brought in India

Pralay Pradyotkanti Ghosh, Ahmedabad vs. Income -Tax Officer, Ward-1, International Taxation, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 298/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.298/Ahd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pralay Pradyotkanti Ghosh The Ito बनाम/ 22, Konark Society Ward-1 Nr. Railway Colony International Taxation V/S. Jawahar Chowk, Sabarmati Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 380 019 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abypg 6172 C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 01/06/2022, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S.144C(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 22/10/2021 Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. Pralay Pradyotkanti Ghosh Vs. Ito (Intl.Taxation) Asst. Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 192Section 2Section 5(2)(b)

with the explanation submitted by the assessee, the Assessing Officer, added back Rs.61,74,262/- to the total income of the assessee under section 5(2)(b) r.w.s. 9(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. 3. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal

DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Elitecore Technologies Private Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1728/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1728/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dy.Cit Elitecore Technologies Pvt.Ltd. Circle-2(1)(1) बनाम/ (Now Merged With Sterlite Ahmedabad Technolgies Limited) V/S. 904, Silicon Tower, B/H. Pariseema Building Off. C.G. Road Ahmedabad, Gujarat-380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaace 6815G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-10, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 04/09/2019, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Dcit Vs. Elitecore Technologies Pvt.Ltd. Asst. Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 250Section 40Section 92C

since the income derived by these parties, to whom payment was made, is from the source in India, in terms of provisions of section 5(2)(b) of the Act, this income is deemed to accrue or arise in India and since the assessee has failed to withhold

Siemens Aktiengesellschaft, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2153/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI B R BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member)

Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 153Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘H‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI B R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2 (1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Intas Pharmaceuticals Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee as well as Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2128/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 35

outside India and also received commission outside India. But, the AO made disallowances under section 40(a)(i) by noting that as per section 5(2)(b) the all income of non-resident that accrue or arise in India is taxable in India and in his view, income ... section 9(1)(i) and, in effect, outside the ambit of income ‘deemed to accrue or arise in India' for the purpose of Section 5(2)(b) as held by Ahmedabad ITAT in case of Excel Chemicals India Ltd. Vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(1) [2016 72 taxmann.com 284/2017-

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2 (1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee as well as Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1787/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 35