← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Tirunelveli vs. Vvd and Sons Private Limited, Tuticorin

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

ITA 1792/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1792/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Tirunelveli. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By Vvd & Sons Private Vs. Limited, No.182, Palayamkottai Road, Tuticorin – 628 003. Pan: Aaacv 8438J (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri Shiva Srinivas, Addl.Cit Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.11.2024 आदेश /O R Der Per S.R. Raghunatha: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai 19, Dated 30.04.2024 & Pertains To

Section 4Section 801Section 801ASection 80I

attributable to” eligible business. 4. The learned CITA) failed to appreciate that interest received by assessee far delayed payment by TANGEDCO falls under income from other sources since it is the income "attributable to" eligible business and not derived from" eligible business. 5. The learned CIT(A) failed to note ... u/s.56 of the IT Act, 1961. In view of the above, the assessment is completed as under: Total Income Returned Add: Income from other sources as discussed in para no.7.2 Assessed Income Rs.12,27,11,750/- Rs.2,34,23,637/- Rs.14,61,35,387/- Aggrieved by the order

Sadhana Ashok Bhandari, Pune vs. ITO Ward 5(1), Pune

In the result, Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1615/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1615/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sadhana Ashok Bhandari, V The Income Tax Officer, Queenies Duplex, Vidyasagar S Ward-5(1), Pune. Colonym, Salisbury Park, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Agmpb0289Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rishabh Patni – Ca/Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade - Dr Date Of Hearing 14/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] For A.Y.2017- 18 Dated 14.06.2024 Passed U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions & Scheme Of The Act, It Be Held That The Ld.Ao Framed The Assessment Order Without Issuing Show Cause Notice To The Appellant Is Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice & Not In Accordance With The Provisions Of Law. The Assessment So Framed Shall Be Treated As Null & Void. Appellant Be Granted Just & Proper Relief In This Respect.

Section 250Section 69A

accumulated cash balances. Assessee submitted cash book and bank statement for verification. Assessee submitted that she has income from house property, income from other sources and share of profit from the partnership firm. The Assessing Officer(AO) in the assessment 2 order observed that there are withdrawals as well