← 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

Kalna Regulated Market Committee(Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Burdwan

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1348/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1346 To 1348/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Kalna Regulated Market Committee ………………………….……….……Appellant (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Poddar Commercial Complex (1St Floor), Purbasha Bus Stand, Alisha, Burdwan, Wb -713103. [Pan: Aaajk1202A] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan..………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subham Bera, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders All Dated 21.01.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018–19. Ita No.1346/Kol/2025 Is Pertaining To The Quantum Addition & Ita Nos.1347 & 1348/Kol/2025 Are Relaying To Levying Of Penalty U/S 271Aac(1) & 270A Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. 2. At The Outset, It Reveals That The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed After A Delay Of 84 Days & For The Said Delay, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petitions. We Find That The Reasons Cited In The Petition For

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 by making an addition of Rs. 2,09,88,370/- u/s 69A and Rs.9,33,126/- as Income from other sources and completed on a total income of Rs.58,89,461/-. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before

Kalna Regulated Market Committee (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Burdwan

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1347/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1346 To 1348/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Kalna Regulated Market Committee ………………………….……….……Appellant (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Poddar Commercial Complex (1St Floor), Purbasha Bus Stand, Alisha, Burdwan, Wb -713103. [Pan: Aaajk1202A] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan..………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subham Bera, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders All Dated 21.01.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018–19. Ita No.1346/Kol/2025 Is Pertaining To The Quantum Addition & Ita Nos.1347 & 1348/Kol/2025 Are Relaying To Levying Of Penalty U/S 271Aac(1) & 270A Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. 2. At The Outset, It Reveals That The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed After A Delay Of 84 Days & For The Said Delay, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petitions. We Find That The Reasons Cited In The Petition For

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 by making an addition of Rs. 2,09,88,370/- u/s 69A and Rs.9,33,126/- as Income from other sources and completed on a total income of Rs.58,89,461/-. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before

Kalna Regulated Market Committee (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Burdwan

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1346/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1346 To 1348/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Kalna Regulated Market Committee ………………………….……….……Appellant (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Poddar Commercial Complex (1St Floor), Purbasha Bus Stand, Alisha, Burdwan, Wb -713103. [Pan: Aaajk1202A] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan..………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subham Bera, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders All Dated 21.01.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018–19. Ita No.1346/Kol/2025 Is Pertaining To The Quantum Addition & Ita Nos.1347 & 1348/Kol/2025 Are Relaying To Levying Of Penalty U/S 271Aac(1) & 270A Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. 2. At The Outset, It Reveals That The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed After A Delay Of 84 Days & For The Said Delay, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petitions. We Find That The Reasons Cited In The Petition For

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 by making an addition of Rs. 2,09,88,370/- u/s 69A and Rs.9,33,126/- as Income from other sources and completed on a total income of Rs.58,89,461/-. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before

DCIT, Chennai vs. Jagathrakshakan Srinisha, Chennai

ITA 1271/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1253, 1264 & 1271/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Central Circle -2(3), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Jagathrakshakan Srinisha, 1St Main Road, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600 020. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Abfps-1422-E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Chordia, Ca. राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 आदेश /Order Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am: The Present Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.02.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19 (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld.Cit(A), Chennai, In Respect Of The Assessment Order Dated 01.03.2019 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2(3) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) For The Assessment Year 2017-18 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Assessment Year) U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act). :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154Section 270A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एबी टी वर्की, न्यायिक

DCIT, Chennai vs. Jagathrakshakan Srinisha, Chennai

ITA 1264/CHNY/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1253, 1264 & 1271/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Central Circle -2(3), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Jagathrakshakan Srinisha, 1St Main Road, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600 020. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Abfps-1422-E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Chordia, Ca. राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 आदेश /Order Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am: The Present Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.02.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19 (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld.Cit(A), Chennai, In Respect Of The Assessment Order Dated 01.03.2019 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2(3) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) For The Assessment Year 2017-18 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Assessment Year) U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act). :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154Section 270A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एबी टी वर्की, न्यायिक

DCIT, Chennai vs. Jagathrakskan Srinisha, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 1253/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1253, 1264 & 1271/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Central Circle -2(3), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Jagathrakshakan Srinisha, 1St Main Road, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600 020. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Abfps-1422-E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Chordia, Ca. राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 आदेश /Order Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am: The Present Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.02.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19 (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld.Cit(A), Chennai, In Respect Of The Assessment Order Dated 01.03.2019 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2(3) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) For The Assessment Year 2017-18 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Assessment Year) U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act). :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154Section 270A

Further, we find that the AO had made the addition in the assessment order under the head ‘unexplained investment' under the head “income from other sources'. The provisions of section 271AAC are applicable, if the addition is made u/ss.68 to 69D of the Act. Since, the AO had made