Section 17(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.16, 17, 18

Section 17(2) falls under section 17 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 16 (Income from salary), section 17 (Perquisite) and section 18 (Profits in lieu of salary) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 16 of the 2025 ActRead section 17 of the 2025 ActRead section 18 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 17(2) is Puri Constructions (P) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (159 Taxmann.com 441), cited in 7 of the 161 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 17(2)

Puri Constructions (P) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT
159 Taxmann.com 441 · 2024 · High Court
7
citing judgments
CIT v. A.R. Builders & Developers P Ltd.
425 ITR 272 · 2020 · High Court
6
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 17(2)

Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 444/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. B V Vidyulatha &
Section 17(2)Section 18Section 18ASection 21Section 3(8)(b)Section 7A

Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 443/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. B V Vidyulatha &
Section 17(2)Section 18Section 18ASection 21Section 3(8)(b)Section 7A

Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 442/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. B V Vidyulatha &
Section 17(2)Section 18Section 18ASection 21Section 3(8)(b)Section 7A

The Fathers House, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi

ITA 408/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Mr. Prakash Jhunjhunwala, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. Krishna Kumar, D.R
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)

The Fathers House, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) NFAC`, Delhi

ITA 407/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Mr. Prakash Jhunjhunwala, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. Krishna Kumar, D.R
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)

The Fathers House, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

ITA 406/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Mr. Prakash Jhunjhunwala, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. Krishna Kumar, D.R
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)

Sri. Sanjay Ramprakash Saxena, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 176/BANG/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri. Sanjay Ramprakash Saxena, Dcit, G1, Smr Devmuk Cpc, Sy. No.97/104, 9Th Main, Vs. Bengaluru. Bannerghatta Road, Vijaya Bank Layout, Bengaluru – 560 076. Pan : Aozps 7209 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Bharath Shetty, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel. Date Of Hearing : 17.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Bharath Shetty, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 10Section 10(13)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 17(2)Section 250Section 80CSection 80D

Paul Gerard Jenner, Noida vs. ITO, Ward-1 (International Taxation), Deehrtadun

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

ITA 5669/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5669/Ddn/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Paul Gerard Jenner, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Nangia & Co. Llp, A-109, Sector- Ward-1(Intl. Taxation), 136, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301 Dehradun-248001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Anwpj5878L Assessee By : Sh. Amit Arora, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, CIT DR
Section 10Section 17(2)

Jerry Kemp Kartar, Noida vs. ITO, Ward-1 (International Taxation), Dehradun

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

ITA 5668/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5668/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Jerry Kemp Kartar, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Nangia & Co. Llp, A-109, Sector- Ward-1(Intl. Taxation), 136, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301 Dehradun-248001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajzpc0774D Assessee By : Sh. Amit Arora, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, CIT DR
Section 10Section 17(2)

Norman Gorge Wilson, Noida vs. ITO(International Taxation), Ward-1, Dehradun

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

ITA 5667/DEL/2018[23015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Jan 2023

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5667/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Norman George Wilson, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Nangia & Co. Llp, A-109, Sector- Ward-1(Intl. Taxation), 136, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301 Dehradun-248001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abopw3343B Assessee By : Sh. Amit Arora, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, CIT DR
Section 10Section 17(2)

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata -12, Kolkata vs. Sri Raghu Nandan Modi

ITAT/175/2018HC Calcutta26 Jul 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 26Th July, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv… For The Appellant. Mr. Sohom Sen, Adv. ….For Respondent. Ga/1/2018 The Court : There Is A Delay Of 124 Days In Filing The Appeal. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & Find That Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Having Preferred The Appeal Within The Time. Hence, The Delay Is Condoned. The Application Is Allowed.

Section 17(2)Section 23(1)(a)Section 260ASection 28

Gulshan International Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 10(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5345/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri A.T. Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Nayyar, Sr.DR
Section 17(2)Section 271(1)(c)

Lalita, Alwar vs. ITO Ward - 42(4), Delhi

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

ITA 4307/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2012-13 Lalita, Vs. Ito, C/O K.L. Datta & Company, Ward 42(4), Vashishtha Plaza 2, Delhi. Manu Marg, Alwar, Rajasthan. Pan: Adgpl2634Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2021 Order

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 150Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 56Section 57

Indian Institute of Science vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/277/2015HC Karnataka14 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 17(2)Section 17(2)(ii)Section 192Section 201Section 201(1)Section 260Section 260A

M/S Indian Institue of Science vs. The Asst Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/661/2016HC Karnataka14 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 17(2)Section 17(2)(ii)Section 260Section 260A

Central Food Technological Research Institute vs. The Income-Tax Officer (TDS)

In the result, appeal is disposed of

ITA/486/2014HC Karnataka14 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 192Section 201(1)Section 260Section 260A

Mr. Abhisar Sharma, Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3285/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2005-06 Mr. Abhisar Sharma, Vs Dcit, B-602, Plot No.F-2, Circle-64(1), The Crescent, B-Block, Room No.314, Sector-50, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Noida. Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aigps3840N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr. Date Of Hearing : 12.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th March, 2015 Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act By The Pcit-22, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 22Nd July, 2005 Declaring Income Of Rs.9,00,355/-. The Assessee In The Return Of Income Had Declared Income From Salary At Rs.9,81,964/- & Loss From House Property At Rs.81,609/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 4Th July, 2006 At The Same Income. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 27Th March, 2012 After Obtaining Prior Approval Of The Addl. Cit, Range-7, New Delhi, Vide His Letter No.526 Dated 27Th March, 2012. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 147/143(3) On 28Th March, 2013, Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.11,03,270/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs.9,00,355/- Wherein He Made The Following Additions:-

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 17Section 17(2)Section 263Section 68Section 69C

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 566/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 565/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 564/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)