← 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

M/S. Maple Relators Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 10(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1718/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Barate
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

paper book on pages 10-11, we find that the assessee has declared interest income of Rs. 5,54,257 under the head “income from other sources” and against the said income, the assessee claimed an expenditure of Rs. 4,37,785, thus declaring total income ... under the head “income from other sources”. Further, from the financial statement of the assessee on page 29, we find that the assessee incurred interest expenditure of Rs. 4,05,206. As noted above, as per the assessee it has borrowed funds from several parties on which interest was paid

Anidhi Impex P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3998/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhanidhi Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Comm. Of It-4(1) C/O Asj & Company Llp, Room No. 638, Aaykar 201, Rajshila, 597, Jss Bhavan, Churchgate, Road, Near Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 002 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaeca7748J Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Amit Porwal Respondent By : Manoj Kumar Sinha Date Of Hearing 18.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 14.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-8, Mumbai, Dated 21.03.2013 For A.Y. 2009- 10. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Concise Ground Of Appeal Vide Letter Dated 26.03.2019: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Cit (A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of A.O. Of Treating The Loss Of Rs.1,84,26,264/- Incurred On Mcx Transactions As Speculative Loss U/S 43 (5) Of The Income Tax Act. 1961. 2. The Cit (A) Erred In Not Adjudicating The Ground Relating To Disallowance Of Expenses Rs. 7,851/; & Rs.1,62,819/- Incurred On Security Transaction Tax & Other Charges Of Mcx Respectively, Considered By The A.O. As Speculative. 3. Cit (A) Erred In Not Adjudicating The Ground Relating To The Disallowance Of Expenses Of Rs. 10,00,000/- By The A.O. On Estimation & Ad Hoc Basis Stating As Related To The Mcx Transactions & Hence Speculative In Nature, Without Even Confronting The Appellant Of This Proposed Action By Issuing Show Cause.

For Appellant: Amit PorwalFor Respondent: Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 143(2)Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73

sale of shares as speculation business. The contention of the assessee that it had earned more income from the interest under the head income from other sources therefore it fall within the exception provided in the explanation to section 73 of the Act is not justified since we have adjudicated ... speculative loss as a result the business income earned by the assessee would be more than its interest income shown under the head income from other sources therefore the case of the assesse is not covered by the exception laid down in the explanation to section

DCIT, Circle, Pali vs. Shri Brij Bhushan Goyal, Faridabad

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

ITA 297/JODH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur14 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripotedcit Vs. Shri Brij Bhushan Circle, Pali., Goyal, Jodhpur. House No. 331, Sector Rajasthan. 16A, Faridabad, Haryana.-121002 Pan/Gir No. : Aawpg8405D Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri Amit Kothari, Ca. Ar Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit -Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 14.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – I, Jodhpur Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CA. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, JCIT -DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80CSection 80DSection 80ISection 80T

computed the total income with other disallowances as under: 1 Income from Business or profession 1,67,81,949 2 Income from other sources 64,33,672 3 Addition on account of depreciation 35,151 claim 4 Addition on account of electricity 1,01,574 expenses 5 Gross Total income

Ge Precision Healthcare Llc, Karnataka vs. ACIT Circle International Tax 1(3)(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 404/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 4Section 56Section 56(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

common issue raised in ground nos. 2 to 5 relates to taxability of receipts towards software sub-licence fee as income from other sources under section 56 of the Act and Article 23(3) of India – USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). 4. Briefly the facts relating to this issue ... assessee. He issued a second show-cause notice to the assessee seeking explanation, as to why the receipts should not be treated as income from other sources in terms of section 56(1) of the Act and Article 23(3) of India – USA DTAA and brought to tax in India

Tulsidas V. Patel Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 5(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 556/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2023AY 2012-2013
For Appellant: Shri Prakash K. JotwaniFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati
Section 143(3)(ii)Section 234B

made chargeable: (1) salaries, (2) interest on securities, (3) income from property, (4) profits and gains of business, profession or vocation, (5) income from other sources and (6) capital gains. This classification under distinct heads of income, profits and gains is made having regard to the sources from which income ... falling under specific heads has to be computed for the purpose of taxation in the manner provided by the appropriate section. If the income from a source falls within a specific head set out in section 6, the fact that it may indirectly be covered by another head will

DCIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Chennai Continer Terminal P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 894/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 92C

duty credit entitlement received is not taxable and hence the same should be treated as capital receipt: Treating duty credit entitlement as income from other sources 7. Without prejudice to ground no 2 to 4 erred in confirming that the income earned by the Appellant from the duty credit entitlement ... revenue in nature and taxable under the head income from other sources instead of business income, Income from duty credit entitlement is business income 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, erred in not appreciating that the income of duty credit entitlement is generated from business of managing, developing

DCIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Chennai Continer Terminal P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 893/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 92C

duty credit entitlement received is not taxable and hence the same should be treated as capital receipt: Treating duty credit entitlement as income from other sources 7. Without prejudice to ground no 2 to 4 erred in confirming that the income earned by the Appellant from the duty credit entitlement ... revenue in nature and taxable under the head income from other sources instead of business income, Income from duty credit entitlement is business income 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, erred in not appreciating that the income of duty credit entitlement is generated from business of managing, developing

Chennai Container Terminal P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1119/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 92C

duty credit entitlement received is not taxable and hence the same should be treated as capital receipt: Treating duty credit entitlement as income from other sources 7. Without prejudice to ground no 2 to 4 erred in confirming that the income earned by the Appellant from the duty credit entitlement ... revenue in nature and taxable under the head income from other sources instead of business income, Income from duty credit entitlement is business income 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, erred in not appreciating that the income of duty credit entitlement is generated from business of managing, developing

Chennai Container Terminal P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1118/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 92C

duty credit entitlement received is not taxable and hence the same should be treated as capital receipt: Treating duty credit entitlement as income from other sources 7. Without prejudice to ground no 2 to 4 erred in confirming that the income earned by the Appellant from the duty credit entitlement ... revenue in nature and taxable under the head income from other sources instead of business income, Income from duty credit entitlement is business income 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, erred in not appreciating that the income of duty credit entitlement is generated from business of managing, developing

Shri Gopal Soni, Bikaner vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Bikaner

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 383/JODH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur11 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteshri Gopal Soni Prop Vs. The Acit, Circle – 1 Durga Silver Home Bikaner. Katla Chowk Nokha Rajasthan. Bikaner-334803, Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Aemps5097M Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit -Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Bikaner Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, JCIT -DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 234CSection 69

clearly held that excess stock surrender during survey covered under the head income from business not income from other sources. The Hon'ble High Court has held as under: Shri Gopal Soni, Bikaner "The real issue in this case is whether the excess stock surrendered should be made ... case of Fakir Mohd. Hazi Hasan 247 ITR 290 that unaccounted income ought to be categorized under the residuary head of Income from other sources'. In respect to the said issue, the findings of the Coordinate Bench are as follows: "We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material

Shri Nitin Kumar Moyal, Sikar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sikar

In the result, the appeal of the assesseeis allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 474/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Daulat Ram MoyalFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Finally, the assessee filed his ITR on 12.09.2017 declaring following particulars of his income:- Income from salary Rs. 1,09,500/- Income from other sources Rs. 1,413/- Gross Total income Rs. 1,10,913/- Less: 80TTA Rs. 1,413/- Net Income Rs. 1,09,500/- Notice

Pentel Stationery (India) Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/Asst/Comm of Income Tax/ ITO, NFAC, Delhi

ITA 1830/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm Ad /Joint/Deputy/As Istant Pentel Stationery (India) Pvt. Ltd. Com Is Ioner Of Income 63, B/C , Government Industrial Tax/Income Tax Of Icer Estate, Charkop, Kandivali West , Vs. National E - As Es Ment Center Mumbai - 40 067 Delhi (Apelant) ( Respondent) Pan No. Aci7948C Asese By : Shri. Dhiren L. Rathore, Ar. Revenue By : Shri. H. M. Bhat , Dr. Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 .08.2023

For Respondent: Shri. H. M. Bhat , DR
Section 143

income and during the year the difference of " 61,567 œ was aded to the total income of the asese under the head income from other sources. Asesment under section 143 (3) read with section 143 (3A) and 143 (3B) of the Act was pased th April, 2021 determining

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Venkateswara Rao Thotakura, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 17/VIZ/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 295(1)Section 295(2)Section 90Section 90ASection 91

claim of relief U/s. 90 / 90A of the Act with regard to foreign tax credit. Accordingly an addition was made under the head income from other sources for Rs. 23,35,811/-. The assessee filed a rectification petition U/s. 154 of the Act. The Ld. AO cited the Income

The Central Goods& Serive Tax and Employees Thrift and Co.Op Credit Society Ltd, Kakinada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for satistical purpose

ITA 107/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.107/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) The Central Goods & Service Tax & Vs. Income Tax Officer Employees Thrift & Co-Op Credit Ward-1 Society Limited Kakinada Ground Floor O/O The Deputy Commissioner Of Customs, Port Area Kakinada [Pan : Aacat8895R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri V.Govinda Raju, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

natural justice. 3. The Ld.First Appellate authority erred in making fresh addition of Rs.3,27,037/- added as interest earned, assessed as income from other sources deserves to be deleted on the ground that, there is no interest income earned by the appellant during the A.Y.2018-19. All the income

Dhananjay Madhukar Naik, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2988/MUM/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledhananjay Madhukar Naik V. Ito 12(3)(3) 306, Meghdoot Chsl, Sahaji Raje Marg Room No. 1631, 16Th Floor Koldongri, Vile Parle (W) Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai- 400057 Mumbai- 400021 Pan: Alrpn7498M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Anil Masand Department Represented By : Shri P.D. Chougule

Section 54Section 54ESection 54F

total income at ₹.5,33,00,930/-. Assessee, has declared income from capital gains of ₹.4,44,28,160/- and Dhananjay Madhukar Naik income from other sources of ₹.88,82,769/- and claimed deduction under chapter VI-A of ₹.10,000/-. Subsequently, assessee revised his return of income ... declaring income of ₹.88,72,770/- wherein assessee has offered for taxation only income from other sources of ₹.88,82,769/- and claimed deduction under chapter VI-A of ₹.10,000/-. 3. The case was selected for scrutiny under "CASS" for complete Scrutiny for the reason that assessee has claimed

Nahar Colours and Coatinhgs Private Limited, Udaipur vs. Principal Commissioner Ofincometax, Udaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Aug 2023AY 2018-19
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 801ASection 80I

deduction under s. 57(iii), the expenditure should be incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning the income from other sources and that it should not be in the nature of capital expenditure. The shares in question were purchased by the assessee for the purpose

Society of Indian Automobile Manufactures Supernnuation Scheme Trust, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Banglore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1871/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepesh Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Kant Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(25)(i)Section 10(25)(iii)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234B

said exemption has not been claimed and exemption has been claimed u/s 11 and information given in the columns pertaining to income from other sources and voluntary contributions. As noted above processing u/s 143(1)(a) is done on the basis of information available in the return of income

Society of Indian Automobile Manufactures Supernnuation Scheme Trust, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Banglore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1870/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepesh Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Kant Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(25)(i)Section 10(25)(iii)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234B

said exemption has not been claimed and exemption has been claimed u/s 11 and information given in the columns pertaining to income from other sources and voluntary contributions. As noted above processing u/s 143(1)(a) is done on the basis of information available in the return of income

Bec Projects Ltd., Bhilai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 6/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 06/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Bec Projects Limited 4/5, Industrial Estate, Bhilai (C.G.)-490 020 Pan : Aaacb9275H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

income is not chargeable to tax under the head “profits and gains of business or profession” it will be assessed under the head “income from other sources.” 36. Significantly, the same Finance Act, 1987 also introduced provisos to Section 43B, through amendment (clause 10 of the Finance Bill). The memorandum

Rajkot Jilla Sahakari Kharid Vechan Sangh Limited, Rajkot vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

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

ITA 49/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Achary, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

view that various judicial precedents have held that interest income received by the assessee from cooperative Bank has to be assessed as “income from other sources” and assessee is not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i)/80P(2)(d) of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer erred