← All Phrases

“income from other sources”

Income HeadsSection 56Section 568,248 judgments

The decision most relied on for income from other sources is Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (187 ITR 688), cited in 1,372 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on income from other sources

Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT
187 ITR 688 · 1991 · Supreme Court
1,372
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) possesses co-terminus powers with the Assessing Officer and can direct the Assessing Officer to perform actions he failed to do, but cannot introduce a new source of income in the assessment. The appellate assessment must be confined to the items of income that were the subject matter of the original assessment.

Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO
322 ITR 283 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,283
citing judgments

The interest income earned by a cooperative society from investing its surplus funds in fixed deposits with banks is not "derived from" its eligible business activities and is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, thus not qualifying for deduction under Section 80P.

K.P. Varghese v. ITO
131 ITR 597 · 1981 · Supreme Court
989
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made merely on the basis of a difference in valuation of assets or a Valuation Officer's report without establishing actual understatement of consideration or the source of unexplained funds through proper enquiry. The Assessing Officer must conduct proper enquiry and satisfy the conditions for making such additions.

GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
327 ITR 456 · 2010 · Supreme Court
663
citing judgments

Tax must be deducted at source from payments made to a non-resident under Section 195 only if such payment is chargeable to tax in India. The Assessing Officer bears the onus to establish that the payments made are indeed chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.
342 ITR 169 · 2012 · High Court
658
citing judgments

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT
227 ITR 172 · 1997 · Supreme Court
621
citing judgments

Interest income earned on deposits, particularly before the commencement of business operations or as a requirement for business licensing, is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, and cannot be treated as business income or set off against interest on borrowed funds.

Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT
50 ITR 1 · 1963 · Supreme Court
581
citing judgments

The assessee bears the onus of proving the source and nature of any sum of money or receipt found to have been received by them. If the assessee fails to satisfactorily explain the receipt, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to treat it as taxable income.

Liberty India v. CIT
317 ITR 218 · 2009 · Supreme Court
571
citing judgments

The Supreme Court clarified that for profits and gains to be eligible for deductions under sections like 10B, 80IA, or 80IB, the income must be "derived from" or have a direct nexus to the eligible business activity. Income from incidental sources like the sale of scrips/licenses or interest on employee loans is generally not considered as derived from the eligible business for such deductions.

Judgments citing income from other sources

Adim Jati Seva Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Harda Madhya Pradesh vs. NFAC, ITO(1) Harda, Harda

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 71/IND/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2020-21 Adim Jati Seva Sahakari Assessment Unit Samiti Mydt, Mohanpur Income Tax Department बनाम/ Harda Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaaaa5193M Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.06.2025

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 80P

reply from assessee to the notices u/s 143(2)/142(1), the AO ultimately framed assessment u/s 144 reclassifying assessee’s income as Income from Other Sources and denying deduction u/s 80P. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal before CIT(A) but the CIT(A) dismissed assessee

Sachin Bhandari, Jaipur vs. Itd WD 6(4), Jpr, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 354/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

income declaring income of Rs. 4,27,360/- on 29.03.2018. The assessee declared the income under the head short term capital gain and income from other sources. During the year under consideration, the assessee deposited the cash of Rs. 10,46,400/- as per ITS details generated from the systems ... made by the ld. AO. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has filed the return of income wherein the source of deposit of cash was already considered and thereby making the separate addition is not warranted. Ld. CIT(A) did not considered this aspect

Indrapura Dudh Utpadak Sahkari Mandali Ltd., Mansa vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Gandhinagar

Accordingly estimated the income @ 8% at Rs.1,08,36,147/-, after allowing deduction u/s 80P(2)(c)(ii) of the Act of Rs.50,000/-, and also disallowed interest income of Rs

ITA 625/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Samir Vora, AR on behalf of Shri S.N. Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr DR
Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250Section 40A(7)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(c)

Rs.50,000/-, and also disallowed interest income of Rs.1,77,235/- under the head income from other sources, along with amount of Rs.1,25,000/- towards claim of gratuity u/s 40A(7) of the Act. The total income of the assessee was thus determined at Rs.1,11,38,382/- vide

Dinesh Damodar Shukla, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 891/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)

which addition has been made have already been offered for tax, either under the head "Income from Capital Gains" or under the head "Income from Other Sources"; as such the said addition is leading to double taxation. 2 Dinesh Damodar Shukla 3. The learned CIT(A) erred

Mani Shanthi, Namakkal vs. ITO, Circle-1, Erode

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1224/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1224/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mani Shanthi, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 40, Perumal Koil Street, Circle 1, Sendamangalam, Namakkal 637 407. Erode. [Pan:Ajnps2143N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Senthil Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.10.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 393 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We

For Appellant: Shri Senthil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

assessment under section 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 20.09.2022 by treating the gross agricultural receipts at ₹.29,56,220/- as income from other sources since the assessee could not furnish any details in support of the claim made in the return of income. The assessee preferred an appeal

Gold Coin Apartments Co Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3185/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vidyadhar KhandekarFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmal
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

taxed as business income under section 28 of the Act? In our view, such interest income would come in the category of "Income from other sources", hence, such interest income would be taxable under section 56 of the Act, as rightly held by the Assessing Officer. In this connection ... deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act that fact that interest/dividend income is in the nature of ‘profits and gains’ or ‘income from other sources’ is not relevant. In this regard, it would be pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court

Orient Overseas Container Line Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle 3(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2129/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora; Shri Lekh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 244ASection 44B

Answer: ICDS is applicable to specified persons having income chargeable under the head Profits and gains of business or profession' or 'Income from other sources. Therefore, the relevant provisions of ICDS shall also apply to the persons computing income under the relevant presumptive taxation scheme. For example, for computing presumptive

ITO, Ward-1(1), Faridabad vs. Chaman, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2774/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Chaman, Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), H. No. 437, Sector-9, Faridabad Faridabad Pan: Bfapd6698P (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.103/Del/2024 [Arising Out Of Ita No.2774/Del/2024] Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Chaman, H. No. 437, Sector-9, Ward-1(1), Faridabad, Haryana Faridabad Pan: Bfapd6698P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Gaurav, Adv. Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.06.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No. 2774/Del/2024 & Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No. 103/Del/2024 For Assessment Year 2017- 18, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The

Section 147Section 250(4)

land u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, is in the nature of compensation and not interest which is taxable under the head income from other sources u/s 56 of the Act as held by the authorities below. The compensation being exempt ... capital receipt' forming part of enhanced compensation as envisaged in section 45(5) of the Act to 'revenue receipt' chargeable to tax as income from other sources. The view taken by the Ld. AO that interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition Act received by the assessee is exempt under

Life Care Hospital, Sirohi vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 938/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

issued vide instruction no. 4/2018 dated 20.08.2018. 5. The learned CIT (A) failed to appreciate that income declared ofRs. 63,03,975/- as income under undisclosed source rather than treating it as income under the head BUSINESS AND PROFESSION. 6. The learned CIT (A) failed to appreciate in taxing ... above his regular income in the year under appeal and the income of Rs.63,03,975/- has been disclosed under the head income from other sources (inadvertently on the advice of its Tax Consultant) in its return filed u/s 139 of the Act for AY 2017-18. Since the assessee

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Udaipur vs. Deepak Wahi, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 410/JODH/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)

learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,71,206/- made by AO under the head Income from other source. 3) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi was justified in deleting the addition ... made by AO under the head Income from other source on account of peak balance (Ac No. 84501010008262). 4) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,99,40,698/- made by AO under

Manoj Kumar Khubani, Barmer vs. Dc Cen Cir 2 Jdh, Jodhpur

In the result, stands ALLOWED

ITA 376/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 250

separately offered the income comprised there in u/s 44AD, in addition to his regular income. He also offered additional income under the head Income from other sources taking into account all the loose papers impounded during survey. During the course of assessment, he filed explanation on each and every document

M/S. Patna Womens College Trust, Ranchi vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Ranchi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 495/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi24 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 12Section 143(3)Section 250

determining total income of the assessee at Rs.48,00,000/- by treating the said amount as income from other sources u/s 12 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the order passed

Rishi Agarwal, Guwahati vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Guwahati

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 266/GTY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati24 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69C

gross total Income of Rs 14,65,162/- which included Income under the head Profit from Business & Profession Rs 14,53,999/- & Income from other Sources Rs 11,163/- The net taxable income after deductions under chapter VIA was reported Rs 13,02,740/-. 5. That the case

Nitin Prabhakar Vaidya, Nagpur vs. ITO 1(5), Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 47/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Madhuri Joshi, Ld.CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld.Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250

also submitted that the petitioner has a strong prima facie case on merits and the addition of ₹9,00,000 as "income from other sources" is based on incorrect assumptions and not on any real receipt or accrual. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in various cases has held that

The Central Financial Credit and Investment Co Operative India Ltd, Kottayam vs. Income Tax Officer, Kottayam

In the result, we dismiss these I

ITA 282/COCH/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

funds with Scheduled Banks of Rs. 1,69,14,524/- by holding that the interest income so earned is assessable under the head “income from other sources”. 3. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order dismissed ... benefit of the individual members and not to the Society itself; that in relation to the Society, it was to be treated as income from other sources since the interest income had lost its nexus with the principal income earned by the Society. The facts in the instant cases

The Eroor Service Cooperative Bank Limited No E859, Eroor vs. Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 2(1), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 259/COCH/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jun 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2020-21 Eroor Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Eroor P.O., Thripunithura, Ernakulam 682306 [Pan: Aacat5303Q] Vs. Ito, Corporate Ward 2(1), Kochi .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Amaljit P.J., Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 26.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 03.02.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Kerala State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1969. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Accepting Deposits From Members & Providing Credit Facilities To Members. The Return Of Income For Ay 2020-21 Was Filed On 22.12.2020 Declaring Nil

For Appellant: Shri Amaljit P.J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 63Section 64Section 80P

Bank/State Co-operative Bank, in the facts and circumstances of the case, do come within Section 80P(2)(d). Therefore, the income constitutes income from other sources and the only eligible deduction is covered by Section 80P(2)(d) viz. Interest or dividend derived by the assessee from its investments

Sanjoy Kumar Ghosh, Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Burdwan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 776/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 776/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Sanjoy Kumar Ghosh,………….………..………Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan:Adepg2967P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………..….…....Respondent Ward-1(4), Burdwan, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Compound, Burdwan-713101, West Bengal Appearances By: Parna Dutta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 24, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Rs.5,62,740/-. As the assessee did not furnish anything, the ld. Assessing Officer treated the amount of Rs.5,62,740/- as undisclosed income from other sources and added to the total income of the assessee. From the balance-sheet it was noticed that the total amount of investment

Vijay Shankar Pandey, Kolkata vs. Ward 33(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 695/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 695/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Vijay Shankar Pandey,………………..………Appellant 4/7A, Commerce House, 2, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkata-700013 [Pan:Afspp7040Q] -Vs.- Assessing Officer,……………….…..….…....Respondent Ward-33(2), Kolkata, 10 Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Ms. Sarita Chobey, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 24, 2025 O R D E R

Section 56(2)(vii)

value of the property as per Stamp Duty Authority from the consideration amount shall not be chargeable to Income tax under the head ‘Income from Other Sources’ under the provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on or before 19.11.2018. However, the assessee ... Rs.7,03,032/- (Rs.32,91,891 - Rs.25,88,859) was added back to the total income of the assessee under the head income from Others Sources u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The ld. Assessing Officer determined the assessed taxable income of the assessee

Bab-E-Rehmat Educational Society, Mumbra Thane vs. AO Exemtion Ward Thane, Quereshi Mansion

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3119/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Bab-E-Rehmat Educational Society Ao Exemption Ward Thane Fakir Shah Baba Hill Road, Near Darul Falah, Near Sahil Hotel, Kausa, Vs. Mumbai – 400612. Pan/Gir No. Aabtb7190H (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Himanshu Gandhi Respondent By : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Ar. Date Of Hearing : 23.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Addl/Jcit (A)-2, Bengaluru (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2023-24. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1) Rejection Of Approval Claimed U/S 12Aa Is Bad In Law Assessee Having Exemption Certificate U/S 12Aa Dated 25 April 2016, As Per Old Registration Process Once An Organization Obtains Section 12Aa Registration, The Validity Of The Registration Is Perpetual Unless It Is Cancelled Or Revoked By The Income Tax Department. Unlike Certain Registrations Requiring Periodic Renewal, Section 12Aa Of Income Tax Act Has No Expiration Date Or A Specific Time Limit. Which Is Valid For Life Time Of Society/Trust That Means Appellant Is Eligible For 12Aa Registration Till Cancellation Or Revoked By The Income Tax Department. Bad-E-Rehmat Educational Society

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, SR. AR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 250

High Court. The revenue authorities have also allowed to set off of the business income with loss computed under the head "income from other sources" which is in tune with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Since, exemption under section 11 is not to be allowed

The Staff Gratuity Fund of the Maharashtra State Co Op Cotton Growers Mrkd, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2913/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhrithe Staff Gratuity Fund Of Vs. Commissioner Of Income The Maharashtra State Co- Tax (Appeals)-National Op Cotton Growers Markd Faceless Appeal Centre, 201, Jolly Bhavan No. 2, New Delhi & Ito 25(2)(1), 2Nd Floor, Room No. 247, 2Nd Floor, 7 New Marine Lines, Kautilya Bhavan, Churchgate, ‘G’ Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020. Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt8512G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Gautam GokhaleFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr
Section 10(25)(iv)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 154

Tech Educational Society [2020] 122 taxmann.com 287 (Indore- Trib), wherein it has been held that even if revenue brought to tax receipt as income from other sources, it was not justified in denying the benefit of a genuine claim of incidental expenditure ... entitled to claim genuine expenses incurred for the purpose of its activities against the interest income which is assessable under the head ‘Income from Other Sources’. Accordingly, we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim genuine expenses u/s. 57 (iii) of the Act against interest income