← All Phrases

“Section 5(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 5Section 5(1)2,233 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 5(1) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 5(1)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.
312 ITR 254 · 2009 · Supreme Court
968
citing judgments

Foreign exchange fluctuations, whether gains or losses, are inextricably linked to the underlying business transaction and must be accounted for under the mercantile system. The Supreme Court also affirmed the standard accounting principle of valuing stock at cost or net realisable value, whichever is lower.

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT
384 ITR 490 · 2016 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Co-operative banks are not fundamentally different from co-operative societies, entitling them to claim deductions under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, including for interest income treated as business income.

CIT v. Samsung Electronics Ltd.
345 ITR 494 · 2012 · High Court
461
citing judgments

Payments by Indian residents to non-resident foreign software suppliers for software are considered royalty, constituting income deemed to accrue in India under section 9(1)(v), thereby requiring tax deduction at source under section 195.

Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT
288 ITR 408 · 2007 · Supreme Court
394
citing judgments

Income from offshore supply of goods and services is not taxable in India if the entire transaction, including transfer of ownership and payments, occurs outside India.

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)
315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
363
citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

Judgments citing Section 5(1)

Moreshwar Krushna Baria, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Thane

ITA 1964/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra, CIT D.R
Section 132Section 69C

search and survey be treated differently from the income earned from business in the ordinary course. 119. As per the provisions of section 5(1)(b) of the Act, when income accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to an assessee during the previous year

Moreshwar Krushna Baria, Thane vs. Asst Comm of Income Tax Central Circle-3, Thane

ITA 1963/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra, CIT D.R
Section 132Section 69C

search and survey be treated differently from the income earned from business in the ordinary course. 119. As per the provisions of section 5(1)(b) of the Act, when income accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to an assessee during the previous year

Moreshwar Krushna Baria, Thane vs. Asst Comm of Income Tax Central Circle-3, Thane

ITA 1962/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra, CIT D.R
Section 132Section 69C

search and survey be treated differently from the income earned from business in the ordinary course. 119. As per the provisions of section 5(1)(b) of the Act, when income accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to an assessee during the previous year

Moreshwar Krushna Baria, Thane vs. ACIT Central Circle-3, Thane

ITA 1961/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra, CIT D.R
Section 132Section 69C

search and survey be treated differently from the income earned from business in the ordinary course. 119. As per the provisions of section 5(1)(b) of the Act, when income accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to an assessee during the previous year

Souvik Mukherjee, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4246/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganeshsouvik Mukherjee, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Gupta Ranjan K & Co, Ward-59(3), 208 Ansals Laxmi Deep Laxmi New Delhi Nagar, District Centre, Delhi- 110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Agtpm9231G Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somit Aggarwal, Adv Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/06/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 15Section 5Section 9(1)(ii)Section 90

declared. Since the bonus was declared during the relevant previous year when the appellant was resident, it squarely falls within clause (c) of section 5(1) of the Act. In view of the above discussion, the bonus was chargeable to tax in India during the relevant year ... period for which bonus is received, the assessee was serving only in Singapore and not in India. On perusal of the provisions of section 5(1) of the Act, the Souvik Mukherjee said bonus income would have to be construed as income accruing or arising to him in India

Chitra Jain, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4), Jaipur

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

ITA 26/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani(CA) &For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

reproduced here in below: “6. As per the Direct Tax Vivid Se Vishwas Rules, the prescribed form for the purpose of Section 5(1) of DTVSV, 2020 is Form No. 3. The appellant has been issued Form No. 5 (Order for full and final settlement of tax arrears under section

Shri Sukhjinder Singh, Jalandhar vs. Prinicpal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 71/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 263

Section 5 (3) of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, wherein it has been stated that every order passed under sub section 5(1) , determining the amount payable under this Act shall be conclusive as to the matter stated therein and no matter covered by such order reopened

James Kudakuthiyil Chacko, Kerala vs. DCIT, International Taxation Cricle, Trivandrum

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 863/COCH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year :2012-13 James Kudakuthiyil Chacko, Dcit, Vs. Kbc Enclaves, International Taxation Circle, Laikadu, Perunna P.O. Trivandrum. Changanacherry, Kerala – 686 102. Pan :Ajbpc 2186 R Assessee Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. R. Krishnan,CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 131Section 5(1)Section 69

credit of any income arising or accruing in India in an NRE account vide clause 3 of Schedule 1 to Section 5(1) of the Foreign Exchange Management (Deposit) Regulations 2016, issued by RBI on first April 2016 [FEMA 5(R)/2016-RB]. 5. Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming

Shrimati. Lata Narang, Jalandhar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 35/ASR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Rajinder Kaur, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

Section 5 (3) of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020,wherein it has been stated that every order passed under sub section 5(1) , determining the amount payable under this Act shall be conclusive as to the matter stated therein and no matter covered by such order reopened ... Section 5 (3) of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, wherein it has been stated that every order passed under sub section 5(1) , determining the amount payable under this Act shall be conclusive as to the matter stated therein and no matter covered by such order reopened

DCIT, Circle-19(2), New Delhi vs. Personiv Contact Centres India Pvt Ltd ( Formely Known As John Keels Bpo Solutions Pvt. Ltd.), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 7295/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2023AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Pulkit Saini, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Mishra, Senior DR
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

applicable, as the payments were neither received nor deemed to have been received by the 'FTOs' in India. The first part of Section 5(1)(2)(b) is also not applicable. Hence, we have to test the receipts, as per the deeming provisions contained

The ACIT-Central Circle-2, Rajkot vs. Shri Vicky Balkrishna Mehta, Rajkot

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 130/RJT/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Feb 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal"नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Vicky Balkrishna Mehta, Income-Tax, 7Th Floor, Mansrovar Central Circle-2, Apartment, Royal Park, Rajkot Kalawad Road, Rajkot Pan : Agqpm 6495 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.02.2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 22.01.2020 Passed U/S 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2004-05. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(c)Section 149(3)Section 250(6)

perusal of impugned assessment order, it is seen that the residential status of the appellant is Resident. Accordingly as per the provisions of section 5(1) of the Act, the appellant is liable for tax in India on his global income which includes income which has accrued / arisen outside India

Mesers H.S Akash Agro India Private Limited, Mansa vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-1, Bathinda

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 520/ASR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR
Section 5(1)

arrears for the assessment year under consideration under the “Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020”. A certificate to this effect under Section 5(1) of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 has also been filed. 3. The Ld. DR has no objection. 4. In view of the above

Jairam Gulumal Diyalani, Bharuch vs. ITO, Ward1(5), Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.171/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Jairam Gulumal Diyalani Income Tax Officer, M/S Tulsi Saree, Main Bazar, Ward-1(5), Bharuch Vs. Jambusar, Dist. Bharuch- 392150 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acgpd 8463 L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mehul K Patel, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-D.R सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/01/2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Correctness Of The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Vadodara (In Short “Ld. Pcit”] Dated 07.12.2018, Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”), For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1.0 The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Baroda, Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Holding That The Assessment Order Dated 29-12-2016 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & Thereby Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 Of The I T Act. 2.0 The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Baroda Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Directing The Assessing Officer To Make Additions Of Rs.9,00,000/- On Account Of Total Sums Received From Investment Made In Property Situated At Mumbai. 2.1 The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Baroda Ought To Have Appreciated That The Overall Additions On Account Of The Total Amount Received Have Already Been Made In One Year Or The Other & That There Is No Loss Of Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-D.R
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Court in ITA No. 171/SRT/2019 A.Y.14-15 Jairam G Diyalani the case of Tarulata Shyam Vs. CIT 108 ITR 345 (SC). Further, as per section 5(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the total income of any previous year of a person who is a resident includes all income from whatever

DCIT, Central Circle, Karnal vs. Jai Bharat Gum & Chemicals Ltd., Bhiwani

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 7729/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Dcit, Vs Jai Bharat Gum & Central Circle, Chemicals Ltd., Dhani Karnal, Haryana. Ramjas, Siwani Mandi, Bhiwani, Haryana Pan-Aaacj2998M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Govind Singhal, Sr.Dr Respondent By Shri V. Raja Kumar, Adv Date Of Hearing 12.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.01.2023

Section 5(1)

arrears for the assessment year under consideration under the “Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020”. A certificate to this effect under Section 5(1) of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 has also been filed. Form No.4 issued by the Department is also placed on record. 3. In view

M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DDIT It-3(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 1510/MUM/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2003-2004
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

term „arise‟. Further, there is a clear distinction between the wordings in Section 5 and Article 12(2) of the DTAA. As per section 5(1)(b) of the Act, a non- resident is taxable in India if income „accrues or arises‟ or is „deemed to accrue or arise

M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (Int. Taxation) - 3(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 3135/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2002-2003
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

term „arise‟. Further, there is a clear distinction between the wordings in Section 5 and Article 12(2) of the DTAA. As per section 5(1)(b) of the Act, a non- resident is taxable in India if income „accrues or arises‟ or is „deemed to accrue or arise

ADIT (It)-3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 3130/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2002-2003
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

term „arise‟. Further, there is a clear distinction between the wordings in Section 5 and Article 12(2) of the DTAA. As per section 5(1)(b) of the Act, a non- resident is taxable in India if income „accrues or arises‟ or is „deemed to accrue or arise

DCIT Cen Cir 5(2), Mumbai vs. Satra Properties (India) Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4796/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta
Section 14Section 14(1)(a)Section 238Section 250Section 31(1)Section 33

8338/2017 (Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICI Bank). 3. In the instant case, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) [which by virtue of Section 5(1) of the Code is the AA] has by its order dated 18th July 2017 admitted the petition under Section 7 of the Code filed

Satra Properties (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 3812/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta
Section 14Section 14(1)(a)Section 238Section 250Section 31(1)Section 33

8338/2017 (Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICI Bank). 3. In the instant case, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) [which by virtue of Section 5(1) of the Code is the AA] has by its order dated 18th July 2017 admitted the petition under Section 7 of the Code filed

Digant Laxmidas Kapadia, Mumbai vs. The DCIT CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 622/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Satish ModiFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Singh
Section 143(1)Section 5(1)Section 6

before CIT(A) which was dismissed. The relevant extract of the order of CIT(A) reads as under: “ 4.3 Merits Of The Case: Section 5(1) of the Income Tax Act specifies to scope of total income as under "Scope of total income. 5. (1) Subject to the provisions