← 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

Ishwar Chander Pahuja, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 19(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2560/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanishwar Chander Pahuja, Vs. Acit, Circle 19 (1), C/O Sumer Garg & Co., Cas New Delhi. E-501A, Itl Northex Tower, Plot No.A – 9, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi – 110 034. (Pan : Aafpp4275M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Garg, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2024 Date Of Order : 06.09.2024 Order The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 21.08.2023 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld. Ao Erred In Law & On Facts In Disallowing The Claim Of The Assessee Of Having Earned Agricultural Income At Rs.23,36,957/- & The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. Ao Treating The Same As Bogus Without Making Any Verification In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 10(1)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 234ASection 44A

Assessing Officer observed that assessee is deriving salary income from Pahuja Seeds Pvt. Ltd. as a Director, income from house property and income from other sources. During assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer observed that assessee has shown agricultural income of Rs.23,36,957/- under section

Shyamsundar Maheswari Subham Maheswari, Guntur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 180/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 180/Viz/2024 (धििाधरणिरध/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shyam Sunder Maheshwari V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1) Guntur - 522007 Subham Maheshwari 4-4-141, 7Th Line Chandramouli Nagar Guntur – 522007, Andhra Pradesh [Pan : Avdps7940P] (अपीलार्/ Appellant) (प्र्/ Respondent) करदाताकाप्त्ि्िध/ Assessee Represented By None : राजसकाप्त्ि्िध/ Department Represented By Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar : सुिवाईसमापहोिेक््त्ि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing 03.09.2024 : घोषणाक्तार्ख/Date Of Pronouncement 05.09.2024 : आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [Hereinafter In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1061812956 (1) Dated 01.03.2024

Section 142Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

completed by the Assessing Officer and made an addition of Rs. 27,00,000/- on account of undisclosed income from the head “income from other sources”. During the year under consideration assessee had received loan amount of Rs.20,00,000/- from M/s. Emkay Consultant on 20.07.2012 and M/s. Karan Mercantile

Sparsh Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(4), Haryana

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 86/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Punyah Building Vs Ito Materials Pvt. Ltd. Ward-2 (1) House No.1002, Near Talab Faridabad Shiv Colony, Old Faridabad Haryana Ballahgarh Haryana 122002 Pan No.Aagcp8742B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sparsh Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Plot No.1066, Near Janta Barat Ward-2 (4) Ghar Baba Nagar, Faridabad Faridabad Haryana 121002 Haryana Pan No.Aascs2575D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Speedy Courier Services Pvt. Vs Ito Ltd. Ward- 2 (4) Plot No.1022, Near Talab Shiv Faridabad Colony, Faridabad Haryana Pan No.Aascs2579R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 131oSection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

facts in enhancing the income of appellant u/s 251(1) by a sum of Rs. 76,00,000/- under the head income from other sources by applying section 56(2)(viib) of the Act on protective basis and rejecting the valuation of shares as determined as per NAV method provided ... assessee company be brought to tax. The relevant provision of Section 56 for the sake of ready reference is reproduced hereunder: 2018 "Income from other sources. 56. (1) Income of every kind which is not to be excluded from the total income under this Act shall be chargeable to income

Punyah Building Materials Pvt Ltd, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 2(1), Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 81/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Punyah Building Vs Ito Materials Pvt. Ltd. Ward-2 (1) House No.1002, Near Talab Faridabad Shiv Colony, Old Faridabad Haryana Ballahgarh Haryana 122002 Pan No.Aagcp8742B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sparsh Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Plot No.1066, Near Janta Barat Ward-2 (4) Ghar Baba Nagar, Faridabad Faridabad Haryana 121002 Haryana Pan No.Aascs2575D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Speedy Courier Services Pvt. Vs Ito Ltd. Ward- 2 (4) Plot No.1022, Near Talab Shiv Faridabad Colony, Faridabad Haryana Pan No.Aascs2579R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 131oSection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

facts in enhancing the income of appellant u/s 251(1) by a sum of Rs. 76,00,000/- under the head income from other sources by applying section 56(2)(viib) of the Act on protective basis and rejecting the valuation of shares as determined as per NAV method provided ... assessee company be brought to tax. The relevant provision of Section 56 for the sake of ready reference is reproduced hereunder: 2018 "Income from other sources. 56. (1) Income of every kind which is not to be excluded from the total income under this Act shall be chargeable to income

Speedy Courier Services Pvt Ltd, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 2(4), Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 80/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Punyah Building Vs Ito Materials Pvt. Ltd. Ward-2 (1) House No.1002, Near Talab Faridabad Shiv Colony, Old Faridabad Haryana Ballahgarh Haryana 122002 Pan No.Aagcp8742B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sparsh Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Plot No.1066, Near Janta Barat Ward-2 (4) Ghar Baba Nagar, Faridabad Faridabad Haryana 121002 Haryana Pan No.Aascs2575D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Speedy Courier Services Pvt. Vs Ito Ltd. Ward- 2 (4) Plot No.1022, Near Talab Shiv Faridabad Colony, Faridabad Haryana Pan No.Aascs2579R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 131oSection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

facts in enhancing the income of appellant u/s 251(1) by a sum of Rs. 76,00,000/- under the head income from other sources by applying section 56(2)(viib) of the Act on protective basis and rejecting the valuation of shares as determined as per NAV method provided ... assessee company be brought to tax. The relevant provision of Section 56 for the sake of ready reference is reproduced hereunder: 2018 "Income from other sources. 56. (1) Income of every kind which is not to be excluded from the total income under this Act shall be chargeable to income

Navbharat Builders, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -22(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3534/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaranavbharat Builders, Vs. Acit-Circle-22(1). 323/A-2, Piramalchambers, Behind Hotelanugraha, Lalbaugh. Mumbai-400012. New Shahupuri, Kolhapur-416001. Maharashtra Pan/Gir No. Aabfn1159L (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Shri. Prashant Ghumane.Ar Respondent By Shri. Ashok Kumar Ambastha. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 02.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 05.09.2024 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assesse Has Filed The Appeal Against Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal Nfac Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Income Tax Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: "1.The Order Bad, Illegal & Without Jurisdiction 1.1 In The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Appellate Order Framed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal

erred in confirming the action of the A.O. in making the addition of Rs. 1,62,85,405/- as alleged income from other sources / undisclosed income. 5.2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, no such addition was called