← 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

Nilesh Popatlal Gada, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(4), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1538/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

Firms as seen from Schedule BP of the Return. During the year, assessee has shown loss from house property, short term capital gain, income from other sources and agricultural 5 income. The Assessing Officer(AO) in the assessment order observed that assessee had deposited cash in the bank account between

Maharashtra Gramin Bank, Aurangabad vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

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

ITA 1485/PUN/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1485/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Maharashtra Gramin Bank, Vs. Cit(A), Delhi. Plot No.42, Gut No.33 (Part) Village- Golwadi, Growth Centre, Waluj Mahanagar Iv, Cidco, Aurangabad- 431010. Pan : Aacam8494M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Magar Revenue By : Shri Uma Shankar Prasad Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.05.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1 Erroneous Addition Of Rs. 87,73,904/- I. The Ld. Assessing Officer & The Commissioner (Appeals) Erred In Making & Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 87,73,904/- Without Considering The Appellant'S Explanation That This Amount Is Already Included Under The Head Income From Business Or Profession. The Addition Is Based Solely On The Tds Schedule Without Verifying The Classification Of Income In The Itr, Which Was Incorrectly Classified Due To A Software Error. In The Complex Labyrinth Of Income Tax Law, The Principle Of Finality Serves As A Cornerstone

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh MagarFor Respondent: Shri Uma Shankar Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 144B

selected for scrutiny under CASS. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was found by the Assessing Officer that in TDS schedule the income from other sources was appearing as Rs.1,41,38,144/-, whereas in the income tax return the same was declared at Rs.53,64,240/-, accordingly

Girish Satyanaryan Singh, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2), Nagpur

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

ITA 72/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)(a)

mind. 2) Learned A.O. erred in passed the order u/s.143(1)(a) and treated the income amounting to Rs.7,68,663/- as a income from other sources as against shown by the Assessee as a House Property. Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of A.O. 2 Girish Satyanarayan

Khadakpurna Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Khamgaon vs. ITO Ward-1, Khamgaon

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 420/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Himesh DembleFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(i)

held that the interest income from banks / co– operative banks is not considered as income from business activity rather it is income from other sources. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer for both the assessment years are concerned. 5. During ... 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…..” 19.1 However

Khadakpurna Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Khamgaon vs. ITO Ward-1, Khamgaon

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 419/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Himesh DembleFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(i)

held that the interest income from banks / co– operative banks is not considered as income from business activity rather it is income from other sources. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer for both the assessment years are concerned. 5. During ... 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…..” 19.1 However

Jankalyan Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Tumsar vs. ITO Ward - 1, Bhandara

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 324/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Alfiya RozieFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 80Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(i)

addition under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on account of interest income earned from Nationalised Bank by treating it as income from other sources. 5. The assessee is a Society registered under the Maharashtra Co– operative Societies Act, 1960, which is engaged in the activity of accepting ... deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and added it to the income of the assessee by treating it as income from other sources. 6. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 7. During the course of hearing, both

Utkarsh Nagpur Z P Prathmik Shikshak Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(4), Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 126/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 234ASection 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Sanstha Maryadit 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that sunt of Rs.29,62,592/-is income liable to be taxed as income from other source and is not eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2) of I.T. Act 1961 4. The learned AO and CIT(A) ought to have ... 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…..” 19.1 However

Nipro Medical Inda Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 531/HYD/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Kishore Phadke, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)

declaring total income of Rs.Nil after set-off of the losses of earlier years against income from business and income from other sources. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS to verify the following issues: - 1. Verification of Genuineness of Expenses 2. Claim

Nurunnesha Sardar, Howrah vs. ITO, 47(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 98/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 250

meant for individuals and HUFs NOT CARRYING OUT ANY BUSINESS/PROFESSION. The assessee has disclosed only income from other sources of Rs. 4,64,903/-. The assessee has not disclosed the details of cash deposits during demonetisation period which was required to be disclosed in Para ... copy of the ITR (first 6 pages) is attached herewith as Annexure A. Here the Assessee has disclosed only income from Other Sources of Rs 4,64,903/-. On perusal of the same the Hon'ble ITAT would appreciate that the assessee has filed some false evidences before

M/S. Diach Chemicals & Pigments Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 4(2), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1643/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana &For Respondent: Shri Prakash Nath Barnwal, DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

also debated at the Bar that as to whether the transactions in question were chargeable to income tax under the head ‘income from other sources’ under section 56(2). In addition, it was also fiercely argued as to whether the subject transactions amounted to short term or long term capital

M/S. Diach Chemicals & Pigments Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 4(2), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1642/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana &For Respondent: Shri Prakash Nath Barnwal, DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

also debated at the Bar that as to whether the transactions in question were chargeable to income tax under the head ‘income from other sources’ under section 56(2). In addition, it was also fiercely argued as to whether the subject transactions amounted to short term or long term capital

Shree Shyam Buildstructure Private Limited, Sikar vs. ITO Ward -1, Sikar

Appeals are allowed

ITA 818/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Poonia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 263

assessee had done no business. Hence, the amount credited in the bank account amounting to Rs. 55,00,000/- was added as income from other sources and treated as taxable income of the assessee. With those observations the assessment Shree Shyam Buildstructure Pvt. Ltd. was completed as against the loss ... assessee had done no business. Hence, the amount credited in the bank account amounting to Rs. 55,00,000/- was added as income from other sources and hence, treated as taxable income of the assessee. With said observations the assessment was completed as against the return loss

Shree Shyam Buildstructure Private Limited, Sikar vs. ITO Ward -1, Sikar

Appeals are allowed

ITA 815/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Poonia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 263

assessee had done no business. Hence, the amount credited in the bank account amounting to Rs. 55,00,000/- was added as income from other sources and treated as taxable income of the assessee. With those observations the assessment Shree Shyam Buildstructure Pvt. Ltd. was completed as against the loss ... assessee had done no business. Hence, the amount credited in the bank account amounting to Rs. 55,00,000/- was added as income from other sources and hence, treated as taxable income of the assessee. With said observations the assessment was completed as against the return loss

Sh. Santosh Kumar, Kota vs. ITO, Ward-4, Bharatpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1248/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalsantosh Kumar, Garg Stone & Suppliers, Bazar No. 7, Ramganj Mandi- 326519 Pan No.:Bkkpk 5571K ..... Appellant Vs. Ito,Ward-4, Bharatpur – 321 001 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, FCA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 148Section 245HSection 250Section 251

facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 25, 56,700/- by treating the cash deposit in the bank account as income from undisclosed sources. He has further erred in confirming the addition by not admitting the additional evidence filed by the assessee under Rule ... case of the assessee was assessed ex-parteu/s. 144 of the Act at a figure of Rs. 25, 56,700/- as income from other sources. The assessee being aggrieved with this order of the AO preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), who in turn dismissed the appeal

Sarla Bhargava, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 6(4), Jaipur

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

ITA 1161/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalsarla Bhargava, Sb-166, Gandhi Nagar, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur 302 001. Pan No.:Acgpb 5078B ..... Appellant Vs. Ito,Ward-6(4), Jaipur – 302 001. ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Anoop Bhatia, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT, Ld
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271Section 69

time the case of the assessee was assessed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and Rs. 17, 52,694/- was treated as income from other sources. The assesse being aggrieved with this order of the AO preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), who in turn confirmed

Yuwam Education Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

ITA 1029/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

provisions of chapters on salary, profits and gains of business and profession Or capital gain Or income from house property Or income from other sources. If the same is chargeable to tax under these chapters as per specific provisions contained therein (even before application of provisions of section 68/69/69A ... such deemed income is not income from salary, house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor is it income from other sources' Held, yes. [Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 120 Taxman 11 (Gujarat)/[2001] 247 ITR 290 (Gujarat

Amar Anil Turakhia, Mumbai vs. Ward 24(1)(1), Piramal Chambers

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

ITA 5761/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Kirti SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(x)

provision explicitly states that the difference between the consideration and the stamp duty value shall be treated as income under the head "Income from Other Sources. The AO has rightly applied the provisions of section 56(2)(x) in the present case. Therefore, I find no infirmity in the order

ACIT, Mumbai vs. Celerity Power, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2302/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantand

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56Section 80

given, the assessee was asked to show cause why the income from the sale of Renewable Energy Certificates be not treated as “income from other sources”. The AO, after considering the submissions of the assessee, held that to be eligible for deduction under section ... business within the meaning of section 80-IA of the Act. Accordingly, the amount of INR 4,14,29,310 was treated as “income from other sources", and accordingly, taken out from the total income for the purpose of calculation of deduction under section

M/S Celerity Power, Mumbai vs. ACIT, 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2234/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 56Section 80

given, the assessee was asked to show cause why the income from the sale of Renewable Energy Certificates be not treated as "income from other sources". The AO, after considering the submissions of the assessee, held that to be eligible for deduction under section ... business within the meaning of section 80-IA of the Act. Accordingly, the amount of INR 4,14,29,310 was treated as "income from other sources", and accordingly, taken out from the total income for the purpose of calculation of deduction under section

Saini Co Operative Tharift and Credit Society Ltd, Delhi vs. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi

ITA 836/DEL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 834/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 836/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Saini Co-Operative Thrift & Credit Vs Cit(A)-16, Society Ltd., 2420-2421, Bazar New Delhi-110002 Kamra Bangash, A. G. C. R. Central Delhi, New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabas8396K Assessee By : Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. & Sh. V. Rajkumar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Assessee’S Twin Appeal In Ita No. 834/Del/2024 For Assessment Years 2011-12, Arise Against The Cit(A)-16, New Delhi’S Order Dated 06.08.2019 Passed In Case No. 10333/2018-19 In Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 & It’S Latter Appeal Ita No. 836/Del/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16, Is Directed Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059607361(1) Dated 11.01.2024, In Proceedings U/S 271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

parties or nonmembers does not quality for exemption u/s.80P. It is an admitted position that the interest so earned should be taxed as 'income from other sources' There is a cleavage of judicial opinion among several High Courts on the issue of eligibility of this kind of income for exemption