← All Phrases

“Section 17(1)(iv)”

Section References (mined)Section 17Section 17(1)(iv)9 judgments

V RAMAKRISHNAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE III(4) , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 744/CHNY/2005[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2025AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 132Section 148Section 15Section 158BSection 17(1)(iv)

observed that the assessee had admitted the head “Salary”, remuneration and commission as Managing Director from M/s PPL and by operation of Section 17(1)(iv) of the Act, salary includes commission, which the assessee had offered to tax for some of the previous years falling within the block period

V RAMAKRISHNAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE III(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 2197/CHNY/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2025AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 132Section 148Section 15Section 158BSection 17(1)(iv)

observed that the assessee had admitted the head “Salary”, remuneration and commission as Managing Director from M/s PPL and by operation of Section 17(1)(iv) of the Act, salary includes commission, which the assessee had offered to tax for some of the previous years falling within the block period

BISWAS MANIK,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(4), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 770/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 133(6)Section 17Section 17(2)(v)

policies from LIC on the life of the director, was assessable as salary in the hands of the director under section 15 r.w. sections 17(1)(iv) and 17(2)(v) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 6.7 In view of the above, it is very clear that

SHIVABASAPPA KARIYAPPANAVAR ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1537/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2024AY 2017-18
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

nassessee in the previous year whether paid or not is chargeable under the\nhead “Salaries.\" Further on plain reading of the section 17(1)(iv) of the Act\nfor the purpose of the section 15 & section 16 of the Act, the Salary includes\nprofits in lieu of salary or wages ... nbeen given the character of \"profits in lieu of salary\" and are included in the salary income of\nthe employee by virtue of section 17(1)(iv) of the Act. The expression "profits in lieu of\nsalary\" has to be understood as comprehending not only such things as they signify

PRAVEEN BAKSHI ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 8 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for both years are partly allowed as above

ITA 7135/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 132Section 153ASection 271BSection 44A

employee but even then the character of the receipt or remuneration having come within the definition of salary under section 17(1)(iv) being a fee or remuneration by whatever name it is called and not being excluded by the Explanation 2 to section 15. The appellant/assessee had a dual

PRAVEEN BAKSHI ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 8 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for both years are partly allowed as above

ITA 7134/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 132Section 153ASection 271BSection 44A

employee but even then the character of the receipt or remuneration having come within the definition of salary under section 17(1)(iv) being a fee or remuneration by whatever name it is called and not being excluded by the Explanation 2 to section 15. The appellant/assessee had a dual

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA - 441 / 2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

year it is spent. The 2013:DHC:3744-DB ITA 441/2003 and connected cases Page 34 provisions of Section 15 read with Sections 17(1)(iv) and 17(2) (v) of the Act are materially different from Section 7(1) of the old Act. The words and phrases which were

CIT vs. CJ INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD

The appeals are allowed

ITA - 445 / 2011HC Delhi11 May 2011
Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

receipt of any payment by the employee. Applying this general meaning of the word “profits” and considering meaning given to it under Section 17(1)(iv) and Section 17(3)(ii) it can be said that “advantage” in terms of payment received by the employee from the employer in relation ... Supreme Court has held as under: “Applying the aforesaid general meaning of the word „Profits‟ and considering the dictionary meaning given to under Section 17(1)(iv) and (3)(ii), it can be said that „advantage‟ in terms of payment of money received by the employee from the employer

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI vs. RANI SHANKAR MISHRA

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 1386 / 2008HC Delhi12 Dec 2008
For Appellant: Mr J.R. GoelFor Respondent: Mr Uday Shankar Mishra alongwith
Section 17(3)(iii)

which defines salary for the purposes of Sections 15, 16 and 17. Salary, inter alia, includes profits in lieu of salary as per Section 17(1)(iv) of the said Act. It is in this context that the expression “profits in lieu of salary” has been defined in Section 17