← All Phrases

“liable to tax”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(29A)2,645 judgments

The decision most relied on for liable to tax is DIT v. NGC Network Asia LLC (313 ITR 187), cited in 144 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on liable to tax

DIT v. NGC Network Asia LLC
313 ITR 187 · 2009 · High Court
144
citing judgments

Where a duty is cast on the payer to deduct and pay tax at source under Section 195, the payee-assessee cannot be levied interest under Section 234B for failure to pay advance tax if the payer defaults on its TDS obligation. This principle may also extend to interest under Section 234C.

CIT v. Nestle India Ltd.
14 Taxmann 99 · 1983 · High Court
125
citing judgments

Club entrance fees, if incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes, are allowable as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1). Furthermore, an order holding a deductor liable for TDS defaults under Section 201 must be preceded by an inquiry into the deductee's actual tax payment.

CIT v. Karnataka Power Corporation
247 ITR 268 · 2001 · Supreme Court
124
citing judgments

Income earned during the project construction stage, which has a direct nexus or is inextricably linked to the project's setting up, constitutes a capital receipt not liable to tax and reduces the project cost.

CIT v. Rasoi Ltd.
335 ITR 438 · 2011 · High Court
107
citing judgments

Sales tax subsidies and Industrial Promotion Assistance received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme are capital receipts and therefore not liable to tax. The ruling clarifies the inapplicability of the Sahney Steel judgment to such subsidies.

(supra), Rama Bai v. CIT
181 ITR 408 · 1990 · Supreme Court
84
citing judgments

Interest received on delayed payment or enhanced compensation awarded under compulsory acquisition is a revenue receipt and is liable to income tax.

Bank Vs. ACIT (2005) 142 Taxman 98 (Kerala) (v) CIT(TDS) v. Director, DPS
115 ITD 411 · ITAT
81
citing judgments

The case is an authority regarding the conditions under which an assessee can be held liable, and orders confirmed, under Section 201(1) of the Income-tax Act for failure to deduct tax at source (TDS). It clarifies the circumstances for deeming an assessee to be in default for non-deduction or non-payment of TDS.

CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers
351 ITR 309 · 2013 · High Court
77
citing judgments

A subsidy or incentive provided by the government for meeting capital expenditure, to achieve a national objective or public interest, is a capital receipt and thus not liable to income tax. The nature of the subsidy is determined by applying the 'purpose test'.

CIT v. Wipro Ltd. (
70 Taxmann.com 129 · Reported
77
citing judgments

Payments are liable for deduction of tax at source when they are in the nature of royalty. The withholding tax liability can be worked out by applying a proportion to the total remittance.

Judgments citing liable to tax

Sri.John Mathew N, Alappuzha vs. The ITO, WD-2, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 81/COCH/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri John Mathew N. The Income Tax Officer Neroth House Ward - 2, Alleppey Vs. No. 1, Jubilee Road Alappuzha [Pan: Acupm8885D] Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Anil D. Nair & Shri P.K. Biju, Advocates Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Appeal By The Assessee Challenges The Validity Of The Reassessment Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 20.11.2007 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2001-02, Since Upheld In First Appeal Vide Order Dated 24.01.2018 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kottayam (‘Cit(A)’ For Short). 2.1 At The Outset, Shri Anil D. Nair, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee-Appellant, Would Submit That The Basis Of The Assessee’S Challenge Is Two-Fold: (A) Non-Supply Of The Reasons Recorded; & (B) True & Full Disclosure Of All Material Facts Relating To The Income Escaping Assessment By The Assessee Per His Return Of Income.

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair &For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(2)Section 230ASection 234B

case than the assesseee himself narrating the facts resulting in accrual of capital gains in his hands, which he though believes as not liable to tax in view of the status of the subject land as not a capital asset. The argument, seemingly attractive, given the law & facts, fails

Srf Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl CIT, New Delhi

In the result, this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 774/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Ussrf Limited Vs. Acit Unitech Crest, Greenwood Range – 9, City Block – C, Sector – 45, Ltu, New Delhi Gurgaon – 122 003 Pan No. Aaacs 0206 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Shri R. K. Kapoor C.A. Shri Ravi Kumar Revenue By Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit (Dr) Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2016 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-44, New Delhi [For Short, Cit(A)] Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [For Short, 'The Act'] For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under:-

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92C

amount of Rs.3,48,37,38,617/- received on account of CERs transferred was a capital receipt not liable to tax under the provisions of the Act; (ii) allowance of depreciation of Rs.46,11,751/- on goodwill; 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case ... after considering the various decisions cited by the assessee and the Revenue has held the receipt to be capital in nature and not liable to tax. He further submitted that the Hon’ble Tribunal has further held that since the receipt is capital in nature it cannot be considered while

M/S K.K. Enterprise, Rajkot vs. The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed; while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed in above terms

ITA 434/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year :2013-14 The Acit, Cent.Cir.1 Vs. M/S.K.K. Enterprise Rajkot. C/O.Sadp& Co., Cas. Bb House, 5-College Wadi Nr.Kathiyawad Gymkhana Rajkot 360 001. Pan : Aafk 3153 D Assessment Year :2013-14 M/S.K.K. Enterprise Vs. The Acit, Cent.Cir.1 C/O.Sadp& Co., Cas. Rajkot. Bb House, 5-College Wadi Nr.Kathiyawad Gymkhana Rajkot 360 001. Pan : Aafk 3153 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assesseeby : None Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Perannapurna Guptathese Are Cross-Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Ld.Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-4, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, ld.CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250(6)

Accordingly he applied gross profit of tile manufacturers to the tune of 25% to the turnover of the assessee for determining his income liable to tax. The ld.CIT(A) directed the AO to apply a rate of 25% to the total cash deposits which he held represented his business receipts

Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-1, Rajkot vs. M/S K.K. Enterprise, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed; while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed in above terms

ITA 419/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year :2013-14 The Acit, Cent.Cir.1 Vs. M/S.K.K. Enterprise Rajkot. C/O.Sadp& Co., Cas. Bb House, 5-College Wadi Nr.Kathiyawad Gymkhana Rajkot 360 001. Pan : Aafk 3153 D Assessment Year :2013-14 M/S.K.K. Enterprise Vs. The Acit, Cent.Cir.1 C/O.Sadp& Co., Cas. Rajkot. Bb House, 5-College Wadi Nr.Kathiyawad Gymkhana Rajkot 360 001. Pan : Aafk 3153 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assesseeby : None Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Perannapurna Guptathese Are Cross-Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Ld.Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-4, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, ld.CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250(6)

Accordingly he applied gross profit of tile manufacturers to the tune of 25% to the turnover of the assessee for determining his income liable to tax. The ld.CIT(A) directed the AO to apply a rate of 25% to the total cash deposits which he held represented his business receipts

Subhash Chand Dhingra, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1063/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

For Appellant: Smt. Kavita Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 10(37)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 263Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

observed that in this judgment it was held by the coordinate bench that the interest received on enhanced compensation is liable to taxed under the head “income from other sources”. Ld. Pr. CIT then examined the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Hari Singh ... compensation for acquisition of agricultural land. It is held that the interest received on enhanced compensation in the appellant's case is liable to tax under the head income from other sources. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed.” 34. The bench is of considered opinion

Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle-1(1), Gurgaon

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1061/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

For Appellant: Smt. Kavita Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 10(37)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 263Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

observed that in this judgment it was held by the coordinate bench that the interest received on enhanced compensation is liable to taxed under the head “income from other sources”. Ld. Pr. CIT then examined the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Hari Singh ... compensation for acquisition of agricultural land. It is held that the interest received on enhanced compensation in the appellant's case is liable to tax under the head income from other sources. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed.” 34. The bench is of considered opinion

Satish Kumar Dhingra, Haryana vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), Gurgaon

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1060/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

For Appellant: Smt. Kavita Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 10(37)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 263Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

observed that in this judgment it was held by the coordinate bench that the interest received on enhanced compensation is liable to taxed under the head “income from other sources”. Ld. Pr. CIT then examined the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Hari Singh ... compensation for acquisition of agricultural land. It is held that the interest received on enhanced compensation in the appellant's case is liable to tax under the head income from other sources. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed.” 34. The bench is of considered opinion