← 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

Braham Dutt Vashist, Gurgaon vs. ITO-Ward -1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 170/DEL/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 170/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Braham Dutt Vashist, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca M. R. Sahu, Ward-1(3), H. No. 651, 1St Floor, Sector-10A, Gurgaon-122001 Near G. D. Goenka Public School, Gurgaon-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Affpv0127D Assessee By: Sh. M. R. Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1083989454(1) Dated 23.12.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. M. R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

taxmann.com 301 (Del.) wherein the department has succeeded before their lordships that the impugned interest component ought to be assessed as income from “other” sources only. 5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s foregoing vehement contention. It emerges that this tribunal ... 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

Ramavtar, Rewari vs. ITO, Rewari

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 140/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2020-21 Ramavtar, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Anu Jain & Company, Ward-1(3), 272-R, First Floor, Near Palika Near Hindu High School, Complex, Model Town, Rewari, Model Town, Rewari, Haryana-123401 Haryana-123401 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Apdpa0001R Assessee By: None Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2020-21 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1083470019(1) Dated 09.12.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

taxmann.com 301 (Del.) wherein the department has succeeded before their lordships that the impugned interest component ought to be assessed as income from “other” sources only. 5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s foregoing vehement contention. It emerges that this tribunal ... 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

Shri Jamnadas Virjibhai Bhalodia, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Ward- 1 (1) (2), Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 182/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपील सं. /Ita No.182/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम/ Shri Jamnadas Virjibhai Bhalodia Income Tax Officer B-602, Pentagon Tower, Opp. Vs Ward – 1(1)(2), Rajkot Speedwell Party Plot, Behind Govani Chhatralay, Rajkot, Gujarat - 360005 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afzpb6922N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar राज"की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

this notice, the assessee filed e-submission/s as called for during the course of assessment proceedings. The assessee earned agricultural income and income from other sources during the year under consideration. As per the SFT account summary details, the assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 10,46,500/- into ... proprietary business in the name and style, as Star Plastic in around financial year 1992-93. Before that the assessee was deriving income from other sources and from agricultural operations and filing the return of income with the ITO Ward VIII(H), Ahmedabad till A.Y. 1987-88. The ACIT, Investigation

Mahesh Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Ahilyanagar vs. Pr CIT, Pune-1, Pune

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

ITA 1300/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1300/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Mahesh Nagari Sahakari Vs. Pr. Cit, Pune-1. Patsanstha Maryadit, At Post Bhingar, Ahmednagar Camp, S.O. Burhanagar, Ahilyanagar- 414002. Pan : Aadam4172H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prasad S. Bhandari (Virtual) Revenue By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2025 Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act By Ld. Pr. Cit, Pune-1 [‘Ld. Pcit’] For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Prevailing Circumstances Of The Case, Respected Pcit Pune 1 Erred Passing The Impugned Revision Order Under Section 263 Without Appreciating The Fact That Interest On The Deposits Made By A Assessee Co-Operative Society Out Of Its Business Proceeds With The Co-Operative Bank Is Eligible

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S. Bhandari (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(f)

Taxman 282 (SC) and accordingly held that the interest income earned on surplus funds was taxable under the head ‘Income from other sources’ and the FAO has not verified this aspect. Accordingly, the assessment order dated 23.09.2022 was set-aside to the file of the Assessing Officer to reframe

Income Tax Officer, Dhule vs. Dharatidhan Fertilisers Limited, Dhule

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

ITA 773/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale (Virtual)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

with no option but to treat the same as unexplained money and thus the AO had correctly added the amount under the head "Income from other sources". 5. Issuer company allows its securities in a span of 60 days from the date of receiving the application money for such securities

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society, Chennai

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2096/CHNY/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Feb 2026

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

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. Vignesh Kumarasamy, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

interest income received from the aforesaid banks, including interest earned on savings bank accounts with commercial banks, was assessed under the head ‘Income from Other Sources’ and added to the total income of the assessee by denying deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act amounting to Rs.6

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Chennai

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2095/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. Vignesh Kumarasamy, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

interest income received from the aforesaid banks, including interest earned on savings bank accounts with commercial banks, was assessed under the head ‘Income from Other Sources’ and added to the total income of the assessee by denying deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act amounting to Rs.6

G Corp Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax 3(1)(2), Bangalore

ITA 849/BANG/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri KashyapFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N., JCIT-DR
Section 111ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 24

hands of the Appellant. Both the lower authorities failed to appreciate that 1% rent/license fees collected and retained by Lido was income diverted at source due to overriding title and was not taxable in the hands of the Appellant. Both the lower authorities erred in holding that the Common Area

Sri Bhyraveshwara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2315/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice –Assessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Sri Bhyraveswara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, 8Th Main, 22Nd Cross, Ward-3(1)(1), Mrcr Layout, Vijaya Nagar, Vs. Bengaluru. Bengaluru, Karnataka – 560 040. Pan: Aaaas6789B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, CA
Section 143Section 144BSection 56Section 80

since the cooperative banks are not cooperative societies, the interest income earned by the assessee is also chargeable to tax under the head income from other sources under section 56 of the act, the deduction of interest earned and received by the assessee is not eligible for deduction under section ... however was of the view that interest income earned by the assessee from above cooperative bank are chargeable to tax under the head income from other sources under section 56 of the act and as interest has been received from cooperative banks and not cooperative societies, assessee is not eligible

Biju Pappachan, Kerala vs. AO, Bangalore

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

ITA 2153/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Ms. Akshatha Prasad, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R Ghale, D.R
Section 250

fact that the assessee had already declared the interest earned from these fixed deposits amounting to Rs. 24,179/- under the head income from other sources. Further, we having accepted the source of income being pension & post retirement benefits are also inclined to accept the same as the source

Jamballi Shivappa, Shivamogga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Shimoga

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2140/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri V. Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R Ghale, A.R
Section 250Section 253(5)

Further, as the assessee had also earned interest income of Rs.17,554/-, the same was also brought to tax under the head “income from other sources”. Thus, the AO completed the assessment proceedings u/s 144 of the Act on a total assessed income of Rs.3,68,054/-. 8. Aggrieved

Hulgol Seva Sahakari Sangh, Uttara Kannada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sirsi

In the result we reverse the orders of the Ld

ITA 2068/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year :2017-18 M/S. Hulgol Seva Sahakari Sangh, Bhairumbe,Sirsi-Yellapura Road, The Income Tax Officer, Sirsi Taluk, Uttara Kannada, Ward-1, Vs. Karnataka – 581402. Sirsi. Pan: Aaajh0032P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Shridhar Hegde, CA
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(iv)Section 890

comprising in the total interest of Rs. 37,39,504/- should not be disallowed and why interest income should not be considered as Income from Other sources. Further as the assessee has received interest from cooperative bank it is not eligible for deduction u/s 890 P (2) (d) also ... members. Even otherwise if the Assessee is not granted deduction, the interest income so earned which is proposed to be taxed as income from other sources u/s. 56 of the Page 3 of 7 Act, the Assessee must be allowed cost of fund amounting to Rs. 18,31,222/- alternatively

Hiriadka Souharda Sahakari (Ni), Udupi vs. ITO-Ward 1&Tps, Aadi Udupi

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1966/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year :2017-18 M/S. Hiriadka Souhadra Sahakari (Ni), Post Office Main Road, The Income Tax Officer, Hiriadka, Udupi, Ward-1& Tps, Vs. Karnataka – 576 113. Udupi. Pan: Aabah2220H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Poojary, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

credit facilities to its members. As the Assessee has claimed it as a business income, the Ld. Assessing Officer has treated it as income from other sources based on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court. We find that there are decisions of the Hon’ble Karnataka High

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Hitesh Shantilal Mehta, Mumbai

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

ITA 7865/MUM/2025[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: adverting to the merits, it is necessary to record that Ground No. 1 raised in the cross-objection was expressly stated to be not pressed by the learned counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 of the cross-objection is dismissed as not pressed. The adjudication hereinafter is, therefore, confined exclusively to Ground No. 2 of the cross- objection, which pertains to the allowability of interest expenditure under section 57 of the Act. 4. Briefly stated, th

Section 143(3)Section 57

identical facts, the Tribunal has consistently held that once a nexus is established between the borrowing and the income assessable under the head “Income from other sources”, the entire interest expenditure is allowable under section 57 of the Act, and there is no warrant in law to restrict such deduction ... examining the nature of borrowing and its 5 ITA No.7865/Mum/2025 & CO No.400/Mum/2025 Hitesh Shantilal Mehta nexus with the income assessable under the head “Income from other sources”, allowed the entire interest expenditure claimed under section 57 of the Act without restricting the same to the interest income. The relevant extract

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Hitesh Shantilal Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 7798/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 268ASection 57

Tribunal has consistently taken the view that once a nexus is established between the borrowing and the income assessable under the head “Income from other sources”, the entire interest expenditure is allowable under section 57 of the Act, and there is no warrant in law to restrict such deduction merely ... Year 2012-13 in ITA No.4430/Mum/2017, wherein, after examining the nature of borrowing and its nexus with the income assessable under the head “Income from other sources”, the Tribunal categorically allowed the entire interest expenditure claimed under section 57 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Hitesh Shantilal Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 7797/MUM/2025[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2004-05

Bench: the Tribunal, as stipulated under CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024. It was also not the case of the Revenue that the present appeals fall within any of the exceptions carved out in the said Circular. In view of this admitted position and having regard to the binding nature of the Circular, which expressly applies even to pending appeals, the maintainability of the Revenue's appeals stands squarely governed by the said Circular. 3

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 268ASection 57

Tribunal has consistently taken the view that once a nexus is established between the borrowing and the income assessable under the head “Income from other sources”, the entire interest expenditure is allowable under section 57 of the Act, and there is no warrant in law to restrict such deduction merely ... Year 2012-13 in ITA No.4430/Mum/2017, wherein, after examining the nature of borrowing and its nexus with the income assessable under the head “Income from other sources”, the Tribunal categorically allowed the entire interest expenditure claimed under section 57 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Hitesh Shantilal Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 7796/MUM/2025[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2000-01

Bench: the Tribunal, as stipulated under CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024. It was also not the case of the Revenue that the present appeals fall within any of the exceptions carved out in the said Circular. In view of this admitted position and having regard to the binding nature of the Circular, which expressly applies even to pending appeals, the maintainability of the Revenue's appeals stands squarely governed by the said Circular. 3

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 268ASection 57

Tribunal has consistently taken the view that once a nexus is established between the borrowing and the income assessable under the head “Income from other sources”, the entire interest expenditure is allowable under section 57 of the Act, and there is no warrant in law to restrict such deduction merely ... Year 2012-13 in ITA No.4430/Mum/2017, wherein, after examining the nature of borrowing and its nexus with the income assessable under the head “Income from other sources”, the Tribunal categorically allowed the entire interest expenditure claimed under section 57 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced

Balkrishna Peruvad Bhandari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 27(1)(1), Mumbai, Navi Mumbai

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

ITA 5656/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Mr. Balkrishna Peruvad Bhandari, Income Tax Officer, 129, Creatie Industrial Premises, Ward 27(1)(1), 406, 4Th Floor, Tower No.6, Sundar Nagar Road No.2, Vs. Kalina, Santacruz (E), Vashi Railway Station Commercial Mumbai – 400 098 Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400 703 Pan:Aaipb3921H (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR
Section 250Section 40Section 68

erred in not deleting the addition made by the Ld. AO of Rs.2,00,812/- under head 'income from other sources' being amount spent by the appellant on credit card. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the aforesaid addition of Rs.2,00,812/- be deleted. 3. On the facts ... this regard. Therefore, the Ld. AO added a sum of Rs.17,00,061/- to the income of the assessee under the head ‘income from other sources’ by way of unexplained investments in time deposit. The Ld. AO further disallowed a sum of Rs.10

Abdurrehman Shamsulhaq Bapu, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 1(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4479/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT DR
Section 144C(2)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

difference thereof amounting to total of Rs.2.85,57,920/- be not added u/s.56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act as income from other sources. Since assessee did not file any details in this regard, ld. Assessing Officer by quoting the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) added the said ... difference of Rs.2,85,57,920/- as income from other sources. 3.1. Further, regarding the source of investment in the impugned properties, ld. Assessing Officer mentioned that assessee had furnished copies of some certificates of foreign inward remittances from Axis Bank, wherein the remittance was made to Zahra Developers

Rajesh Sahu, Gurgaon vs. Assessing Officer, Nfau

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 78/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2018-19 Sh. Rajesh Sahu, Vs. Assessing Officer, H. No. 2A, Sahu Lane, New Delhi Phase-2, Ashok Vihar, Gurgaon Pan: Avaps9917M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

taxmann.com 301 (Del.) wherein the department has succeeded before their lordships that the impugned interest component ought to be assessed as income from “other” sources only. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s foregoing vehement contention. It emerges that this tribunal ... 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