← 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

ITO, Ward-28(5), Pratyakshkar Bhawan vs. Satish Sawhney, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2118/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarito, Ward 28 (5), Vs. Satish Sawhney, 1St Floor, West Wing, Delhi. Chandralok Building 36, Janpath, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aaaps2377N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2024 Date Of Order : 09.10.2024 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman, Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 29.02.2024 For Ay 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee An Individual Having Income From ‘House Property’, Capital Gain’S & Other Sources. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 31.8.20215 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.44,62,580/-.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 57

assessment order and heavily relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. He submitted that the issue involved is relating to income from other sources. The assessee is claiming expenditure not relating to the earning of such income. He prayed that the order ... more than 75% of the fees or income earned by the assessee. There is no correlation to the income earned under the head income from other sources. In our view, the issue is covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Moody

Viral Vinodchandra Joshi, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gandhinagar

Accordingly, these four appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 612/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.609, 610 & 611/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively Hema Viral Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Admpj 6455 B & आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.612/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Viral Vinodchandra Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abjpj 6812 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 69A

Section under which 69A 69A 69A 68 including addition was made Rs. 3866 added as income from other sources 4 Assessed Income in Rs. 39,62,800/- 47,82,000/- 32,71,000/- 98,60,537/- 5 Date of Order of CIT(A) 08/06/2023 08/06/2023 08/06/2023 07/07/2023 Facts ... were sold at significant profits, but the corresponding income was not reported by the assessee. The AO also added Rs.3866/-, under the head income from other sources being interest received on the bank account. 4. The assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the assessment order, stating that

Hema Viral Joshi, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gandhinagar

Accordingly, these four appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 611/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.609, 610 & 611/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively Hema Viral Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Admpj 6455 B & आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.612/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Viral Vinodchandra Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abjpj 6812 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 69A

Section under which 69A 69A 69A 68 including addition was made Rs. 3866 added as income from other sources 4 Assessed Income in Rs. 39,62,800/- 47,82,000/- 32,71,000/- 98,60,537/- 5 Date of Order of CIT(A) 08/06/2023 08/06/2023 08/06/2023 07/07/2023 Facts ... were sold at significant profits, but the corresponding income was not reported by the assessee. The AO also added Rs.3866/-, under the head income from other sources being interest received on the bank account. 4. The assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the assessment order, stating that

Hema Viral Joshi, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gandhinagar

Accordingly, these four appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 610/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.609, 610 & 611/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively Hema Viral Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Admpj 6455 B & आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.612/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Viral Vinodchandra Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abjpj 6812 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 69A

Section under which 69A 69A 69A 68 including addition was made Rs. 3866 added as income from other sources 4 Assessed Income in Rs. 39,62,800/- 47,82,000/- 32,71,000/- 98,60,537/- 5 Date of Order of CIT(A) 08/06/2023 08/06/2023 08/06/2023 07/07/2023 Facts ... were sold at significant profits, but the corresponding income was not reported by the assessee. The AO also added Rs.3866/-, under the head income from other sources being interest received on the bank account. 4. The assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the assessment order, stating that

Hema Viral Joshi, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gandhinagar

Accordingly, these four appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 609/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.609, 610 & 611/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively Hema Viral Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Admpj 6455 B & आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.612/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Viral Vinodchandra Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abjpj 6812 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 69A

Section under which 69A 69A 69A 68 including addition was made Rs. 3866 added as income from other sources 4 Assessed Income in Rs. 39,62,800/- 47,82,000/- 32,71,000/- 98,60,537/- 5 Date of Order of CIT(A) 08/06/2023 08/06/2023 08/06/2023 07/07/2023 Facts ... were sold at significant profits, but the corresponding income was not reported by the assessee. The AO also added Rs.3866/-, under the head income from other sources being interest received on the bank account. 4. The assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the assessment order, stating that