← All Phrases

“Section 2(5)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(5)17 judgments

DCIT-4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. MARAL OVERSEAS LTD, KHARGONE

In the result appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 571/IND/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshidcit-4(1), Indore Maral Overseas Ltd., बनाम/ Maral Sarovar, V& Po Vs. Khalbujurg, Kasrawad, Khargone, Bhopal

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 36Section 40A(7)Section 40A(7)(b)Section 40A(9)

entitled for the deduction for the contribution made to the gratuity fund which was not approved by the Commissioner of income tax under section 2(5) of the Act in the year under consideration. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Page 17 of 20 Maral Overseas Ltd. ITA No. 571/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2006-07 9.4 Undoubtedly, the gratuity ... fund created by the assessee was not approved by the Commissioner of income tax under section 2(5) of the Act in the year under consideration. In fact, the approval was granted by the Commissioner of income tax with effect from 1st April 2012 effective from the assessment year

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD., KASTURBA NAGAR

ITA 609/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nShri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nMs. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

whether the proceedings or other particulars\nbefore the Income-tax officer at the stage of original assessment\ndisclosed any grounds for relief under section 2(5) (a) (iii) of the\nFinance Act of 1964 or of the Finance Act of 1965, even though no\nclaim was made for that relief ... nwas obvious that in the instant case it was incumbent on the Income-\ntax officer to advise the assessee to claim relief under section 2(5)(a\n)(iii) if the proceeding or any other particulars before him at the stage\nof the original assessment indicated that the assessee

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

ITA 579/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

whether the proceedings or other particulars\nbefore the Income-tax officer at the stage of original assessment\ndisclosed any grounds for relief under section 2(5) (a) (iii) of the\nFinance Act of 1964 or of the Finance Act of 1965, even though no\nclaim was made for that relief ... nwas obvious that in the instant case it was incumbent on the Income-\ntax officer to advise the assessee to claim relief under section 2(5)(a\n)(iii) if the proceeding or any other particulars before him at the stage\nof the original assessment indicated that the assessee

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , CR BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

ITA 578/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

whether the proceedings or other particulars\nbefore the Income-tax officer at the stage of original assessment\ndisclosed any grounds for relief under section 2(5) (a) (iii) of the\nFinance Act of 1964 or of the Finance Act of 1965, even though no\nclaim was made for that relief ... nwas obvious that in the instant case it was incumbent on the Income-\ntax officer to advise the assessee to claim relief under section 2(5)(a\n)(iii) if the proceeding or any other particulars before him at the stage\nof the original assessment indicated that the assessee

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , ITO C.R. BUILDING vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

ITA 577/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

whether the proceedings or other particulars\nbefore the Income-tax officer at the stage of original assessment\ndisclosed any grounds for relief under section 2(5) (a) (iii) of the\nFinance Act of 1964 or of the Finance Act of 1965, even though no\nclaim was made for that relief ... nwas obvious that in the instant case it was incumbent on the Income-\ntax officer to advise the assessee to claim relief under section 2(5)(a\n)(iii) if the proceeding or any other particulars before him at the stage\nof the original assessment indicated that the assessee

REC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT-10 (OSD), DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 320/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

whether the proceedings or other particulars\nbefore the Income-tax officer at the stage of original assessment\ndisclosed any grounds for relief under section 2(5) (a) (iii) of the\nFinance Act of 1964 or of the Finance Act of 1965, even though no\nclaim was made for that relief ... nwas obvious that in the instant case it was incumbent on the Income-\ntax officer to advise the assessee to claim relief under section 2(5)(a\n)(iii) if the proceeding or any other particulars before him at the stage\nof the original assessment indicated that the assessee

REC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT-10 (OSD), DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 319/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

whether the proceedings or other particulars\nbefore the Income-tax officer at the stage of original assessment\ndisclosed any grounds for relief under section 2(5) (a) (iii) of the\nFinance Act of 1964 or of the Finance Act of 1965, even though no\nclaim was made for that relief ... nwas obvious that in the instant case it was incumbent on the Income-\ntax officer to advise the assessee to claim relief under section 2(5)(a\n)(iii) if the proceeding or any other particulars before him at the stage\nof the original assessment indicated that the assessee

M/S U.P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, KANPUR

ITA 4/LKW/2004[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Oct 2025AY 1996-97
For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Shukla, Adv & ShubhamFor Respondent: Sh. Puneet Kumar, CIT DR
Section 10Section 17Section 2Section 2(5)Section 2(7)Section 8(2)

within the ambit of taxation unless, the two conditions, viz, (a) the receipts are in the nature of "chargeable Interest" as defined in section 2(5) read with section 2(7) of the "Act"; and (b) the recipients of such income is a "Credit Institution' or 'any other financial company ... appellant to that extent. 7.2 BECAUSE none of the two sums as mentioned above can be treated as 'chargeable interest' under section 2(5) of the Act read with the definition of interest under section 2(7) of the "Act". 8. BECAUSE the receipts amounting

M/S U.P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee is held to be partly allowed

ITA 3/LKW/2004[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Oct 2025AY 1995-96
For Appellant: \nSh. Pankaj Shukla, Adv & Shubham
Section 10Section 17Section 2Section 2(5)Section 2(7)Section 8(2)

ambit of taxation unless, the two conditions, viz,\n(a) the receipts are in the nature of \"chargeable Interest\" as defined in section 2(5)\nread with section 2(7) of the \"Act\"; and\n(b) the recipients of such income is a \"Credit Institution' or 'any other financial\ncompany ... appellant to\nthat extent.\n7.2 BECAUSE none of the two sums as mentioned above can be treated as\n'chargeable interest' under section 2(5) of the Act read with the definition of\ninterest under section 2(7) of the \"Act\".\n8. BECAUSE the receipts amounting to Rs.1

SHRI JAITESHWAR SEVA SANSTHAN,JODHPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 344/JODH/2025[NA]Status: FixedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025

Bench: Us By Challenging The Revisional Order.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(4)Section 2(5)Section 263

Excess Profits Tax IR 1955 SC 176, (1954) 26 ITR 765 SC, 19551 SCR 952 stated as under: "Business" as defined in section 2(5) of the Excess Profits Tax Act includes amongst others, any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture

SHREE RAM COLLOIDS PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT(1), JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 344/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeshree Ram Colloids Private Vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax (1), Jodhpur C-79, Mia, Phase-Ii, Jodhpur- 342 005 Pan: Aakcs5803L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

Excess Profits Tax IR 1955 SC 176, (1954) 26 ITR 765 SC, 19551 SCR 952 stated as under: "Business" as defined in section 2(5) of the Excess Profits Tax Act includes amongst others, any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture

MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 312/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 194C

Explanation 3, section 115JB is applicable to the assessee who carried on banking business. 7.3.2. The term 'banking company' has been defined in section 2(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 as follows:- "banking company" has the same meaning as in the Banking Companies

TWININGS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 391/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(v)Section 37(1)

Schedule. Part C of the 4th Schedule in respect of approved gratuity fund is extracted below: ‘PART C APPROVED GRATUITY FUND [See sections 2(5), 10(25)(iv), 17(1)(iii), 36(1)(v)] Definitions.— 1. In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires “employer”, “employee”, “contribution” and “salary” have

GULSHAN MERCANTILE URBAN COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, MUZAFFARNAGAR

ITA 3982/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(5)Section 40iSection 43BSection 80

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and

GULSHAN MERCANTILE URBAN COOPRATIVE BANK LTD.,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 1, MUZAFFARNAGAR

ITA 5482/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(5)Section 40iSection 43BSection 80

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and

GULSHAN MERCANTILE URBAN COOPRATIVE BANK LTD.,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 1, MUZAFFARNAGAR

ITA 5481/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(5)Section 40iSection 43BSection 80

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and

M/S. GULSHAN MERCANTILE URBAN COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ACIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

ITA 2166/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(5)Section 40iSection 43BSection 80

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and