← 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

Sri. Laxminarayana Suvarna Credit Co-Op. Society Ltd., Uttara Kannada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sirsi

ITA 122/BANG/2024[201819]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 May 2024

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R. Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

High Court clearly held that interest earned from investments/bank deposits is outside the sphere of main business activity and to be categorised as “income from other sources”. Since the interest income earned by the assessee from ITA Nos.122 & 123/Bang/2024 Page 4 of 11 investment in KDCC Bank

Vipul Mahasukhlal Gopani, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, Ground No. 2

ITA 3726/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalvipul Mahasukhlal Gopani, A-3003, One Avighna Park, Mahadev Palav Marg, Lower Parel East, Mumbai – 400 012 Pan: Aaapg8761A ....... Appellant Vs. Acit Circle 6(1)(1), Room No. 504, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Jayshree Menon, Ld. DR
Section 10Section 10(37)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250

total income at Rs. 60,01,080/-. During the year under consideration the assessee earned income through Salary, Business/Profession, Short capital gains and income from other sources. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. Case ... liable to be taxed only on reaching its finality. The Tribunal also upheld that the interest had to be assessed under the head "Income from other sources". “The first question came up for consideration was as to whether the assessees were liable to be assessed for the profits earned

Satish Manikrao Sakhre, Beed vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Centre

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2016-17 and AY

ITA 156/PUN/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Umesh RuparelFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

including therein addition of Rs.13,64,160/- as unexplained income u/s 69A; business income of Rs.1,87,45,753/- and income from other sources of Rs.1,52,753/-. For AY 2017-18 the Ld. AO computed total income at Rs.2,06,02,253/- including therein additions of Rs.27

Satish Manikrao Sakhre, Beed vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2016-17 and AY

ITA 155/PUN/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Umesh RuparelFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

including therein addition of Rs.13,64,160/- as unexplained income u/s 69A; business income of Rs.1,87,45,753/- and income from other sources of Rs.1,52,753/-. For AY 2017-18 the Ld. AO computed total income at Rs.2,06,02,253/- including therein additions of Rs.27

Sakshi Maheshwari, Kota Rajasthan vs. ACIT, DCIT, Central Circle, Kota, Kota Rajasthan

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

ITA 584/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

brief facts of the case are that the appellant is Sakshi Maheshwari, A666 D Indra Vihar, Kota is an Individual. The appellant derives income from other sources. She was partner of firm M/s Radha Residency which runs hostel business. A search & seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income ... individual resident at A-666 D Indra Vihar, Kota(Raj.), derives income from Partnership M/s Radha Residency running hostel business and Income From Other Sources including Interest & Lease Rentals & she is the daughter of Shri Rajesh Maheshwari, partner of ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE. That there was search conducted at Allen Career

Bannanje Grahakara Vividhoddesha Sahakara Sangha Ltd., Udupi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, & Tps, Udupi

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

ITA 79/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing
Section 5

deposit to the tune of 3,90,951/- Any interest income arising from deposit /investment of funds in banks is, in the nature, Income from Other Sources taxable u/s 56 of the Income-tax Act and cannot be categorized as the income from the 'Profits and Gains of Business ... facilities to its members, the said deduction is not available to the interest income which is in the nature of 'Other Income' or 'Income from Other Sources'. During the assessment Proceedings, Ld. AO has raised this issue to the appellant who stated that the source of funds for the investment

Shree Pushpagiri Souharda Sahakari Niyamitha, Hassan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Hassan

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

ITA 506/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 250Section 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

income from bank interest on which also assessee claimed deduction u/s 80P of the Act. The same has been denied and treated as income from other sources. Further, assessee made a deposit of Rs.8,76,95,000/- into assessee’s bank account during demonetization period. Out of this, an amount ... prejudice to the above, we make it clear that if the interest earned by assessee from the banks is considered under the head “Income from other sources”, relief to be granted to the assessee u/s 57 of the Act in accordance with law. Accordingly, the issue is restored

Gsss Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for

ITA 248/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

assessee on the ground that interest income earned by making investment of surplus funds has to be assessed under the head "Income from Other Sources" and not income from business and since interest income is not assessed as business income, the claim for deduction under section ... securities by a Co-operative Society providing credit facilities to members or marketing agricultural produce to members is not business income but income from other sources and the society is not entitled to special deduction. 2.7. While Ld.AR relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court

M/S Satwant Agro Engineers, Bhawanigarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala

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

ITA 753/CHANDI/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69A

date of survey. 7. That Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not considered the finding with regard to "deemed income" although treated as income from undisclosed source yet it was duly added and assessed in business income of the appellant. The firm has no other source of income. 8. That ... classify such incomes under any of specific heads, even if there is any activity which can be remotely/indirectly linked to such deemed income. The word 'source' in the same context would refer to nexus of such income generating activity/transaction with name and identity, creditworthiness of person with whom such activity/transaction

ITO, W-6(5), Mohali vs. Smt. Gurdev Kaur, Kharar

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1448/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148

assessee. 5. In response to the notice, assessee filed his return of income declaring income under the head “agriculture income” and “income from other sources”. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and in absence of any compliance made by the assessee, the assessment was completed ... such receipts which are received over and the declared value of the property registered with revenue authority has to be taxed as income from other sources and such an amount received partakes the character of taxable gift. Although provisions of section 56(2) are without prejudice to the generality

Ajmer Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, W-6(5), Mohal

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1439/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148

assessee. 5. In response to the notice, assessee filed his return of income declaring income under the head “agriculture income” and “income from other sources”. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and in absence of any compliance made by the assessee, the assessment was completed ... such receipts which are received over and the declared value of the property registered with revenue authority has to be taxed as income from other sources and such an amount received partakes the character of taxable gift. Although provisions of section 56(2) are without prejudice to the generality

Ajmer Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, W-6(5), Mohal

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1438/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148

assessee. 5. In response to the notice, assessee filed his return of income declaring income under the head “agriculture income” and “income from other sources”. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and in absence of any compliance made by the assessee, the assessment was completed ... such receipts which are received over and the declared value of the property registered with revenue authority has to be taxed as income from other sources and such an amount received partakes the character of taxable gift. Although provisions of section 56(2) are without prejudice to the generality

The Dabhoi Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 24/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri SN Soparkar, Sr Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr DR
Section 250

stock in trade converted as liquid money and kept as fixed deposits are stock in trade however interest thereon has its characterization as income from other sources due to liquidation process but in view judgment of Supreme Court in case of Western States Trading Co(P.). Ltd. v/s C.I.T ... Bank Ltd Vs. ACIT AYs :2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2013-14 fixed deposits being stock in trade and assessed under head income from other sources ought to have been set- off against brought forward losses. (vii) The Learned CIT (Appeal) failed to consider properly the directions given

The Dabhoi Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 23/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri SN Soparkar, Sr Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr DR
Section 250

stock in trade converted as liquid money and kept as fixed deposits are stock in trade however interest thereon has its characterization as income from other sources due to liquidation process but in view judgment of Supreme Court in case of Western States Trading Co(P.). Ltd. v/s C.I.T ... Bank Ltd Vs. ACIT AYs :2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2013-14 fixed deposits being stock in trade and assessed under head income from other sources ought to have been set- off against brought forward losses. (vii) The Learned CIT (Appeal) failed to consider properly the directions given

The Dabhoi Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 22/AHD/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri SN Soparkar, Sr Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr DR
Section 250

stock in trade converted as liquid money and kept as fixed deposits are stock in trade however interest thereon has its characterization as income from other sources due to liquidation process but in view judgment of Supreme Court in case of Western States Trading Co(P.). Ltd. v/s C.I.T ... Bank Ltd Vs. ACIT AYs :2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2013-14 fixed deposits being stock in trade and assessed under head income from other sources ought to have been set- off against brought forward losses. (vii) The Learned CIT (Appeal) failed to consider properly the directions given

The Dabhoi Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 21/AHD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri SN Soparkar, Sr Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr DR
Section 250

stock in trade converted as liquid money and kept as fixed deposits are stock in trade however interest thereon has its characterization as income from other sources due to liquidation process but in view judgment of Supreme Court in case of Western States Trading Co(P.). Ltd. v/s C.I.T ... Bank Ltd Vs. ACIT AYs :2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2013-14 fixed deposits being stock in trade and assessed under head income from other sources ought to have been set- off against brought forward losses. (vii) The Learned CIT (Appeal) failed to consider properly the directions given

The Dabhoi Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 20/AHD/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Dabhoi Nagrik Sahakari Vs. Bank Limited, Acit, Sahakar Bhawan, Kansara Circle 1(1)(1), Bazar, Dabhoi, Dist: Baroda Vadodara Gujarat-391110 Pan : Aaaat 1314 K अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Sn Soparkar, Sr Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2024 सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03.05.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 28.12.2022, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2007-08. 2. The Present Appeal Of The Assessee, Pertaining To A.Y 2007-08, Was Heard Alongwith The Group Of Appeals Of The Assessee For A.Y 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011- 12 & 2013-14, In Ita Nos. 21 To 24/Ahd/2023. The Facts & Issues Raised In The Entire Group Of Appeals, It Was Common Ground, Were Identical & Similar & The Grounds Of Appeal Were Identically Worded. However, While Dictating The Order For The Entire Group Of Appeals Of The Assessee Heard

For Appellant: Shri SN Soparkar, Sr Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr DR
Section 250

stock in trade converted as liquid money and kept as fixed deposits are stock in trade however interest thereon has its characterization as income from other sources due to liquidation process but in view judgment of Supreme Court in case of Western States Trading Co(P.). Ltd. v/s C.I.T ... such interest income of fixed deposits being stock in trade and assessed under head income from other sources ought to have been set- off against brought forward losses. (vii) The Learned CIT (Appeal) failed to consider properly the directions given by Hon. ITAT without understanding properly the explanations and submissions

Kusum Jayram Thakur, Raigad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Panvel

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1332/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: S/Shri CH Naniwadekar &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 10(37)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 28Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viii)

addition made by Assessing Officer as to Interest u/s.28 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 2 ITA.No.1332/PUN./2023 granted by the Court, as Income from Other Sources u/s 56(2), against Assessee’s claim as Additional Compensation for Acquisition of Agricultural Land. Appellant prays to hold the same as exempt ... authorities findings holding the assessee’s interest income received under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as taxable under the head income from “Other” sources under section 56(2)(viii) of the Act. The assessee’s case before us is that such an interest income is part

Quest Online, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-49(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1046/KOL/2023[2020-21`]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2024

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1046/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Quest Online…………………………………...............................……….……Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, Room No.24, 1, Chandni Chowk Street, Princep Street, Kolkata – 700072. [Pan:Aaafq4820G] Vs. Ito, Ward-49(1),Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate & Sunil Surana, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Datta, Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 02, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 03, 2024 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2020-21Against The Order Dated 08.09.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Only Issue Raised In The Various Grounds Of Appeals Is Against The Confirmation Of Addition By Cit(A) Of Rs.14,82,41,932/- As Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 68 Of The Act R.W.S. 115Bbe Of The Act. 3. The Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 09.01.2021 Declaring Total Income From Business & Profession At Rs.36,73,790/-. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under Cass & Statutory Notices Were Duly Issued & Served Upon The Assessee. During The Assessment Proceedings, The Various Documents & Evidences Were Called For By The Assessing Officer From The Assessee

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

commission received of Rs.14,82,41,932/- remained unexplained and added the same to the income of the assessee under the head ‘income from other sources’ as unexplained cash credit to be taxed as per the provisions u/s 115BBE of the Act and also that the Assessing Officer rejected

M/S Monk Akarshala Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4151/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Blem/S. Monk Akarshala Private Limited V. Dcit – Circle – 2(2)(1) 4116 Oberoi Garden Estate Room No. 545 Chandivli Vlg Farm Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Near Chandivli Studio, Saki Naka Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai City - 400072 Pan: Aagcm4703K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Ajay Wadhwa & Ms. Manasi Vyas Department Represented By : Smt Mahita Nair

Section 234B

Further, the learned CIT(Appeals) and the learned AO were not justified in taxing the said amount as "income from other sources". 3. The learned CIT(Appeals) was not justified in confirming the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer in respect of share premium