Section 2(31) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 2(31) is Ramnath & Co. v. CIT (116 Taxmann.com 885), cited in 30 of the 131 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 2(31)

Ramnath & Co. v. CIT
116 Taxmann.com 885 · 2020 · Supreme Court
30
citing judgments

Beneficial provisions in tax law should be interpreted strictly, with the burden of proof on the assessee. Ambiguous beneficial provisions are interpreted in favour of the Revenue.

Seth Pushalal Mansighka (P.) Ltd. v. CIT
66 ITR 159 · 1967 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments

Income accrues at the place where title to goods passes to the buyer upon payment of the price. For offshore supply of equipment, if the transaction is completed outside India, no income accrues to the assessee in India.

CIT v. Kumari Prabhawati Gupta
325 ITR 563 · 2010 · High Court
9
citing judgments
JCIT v. Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
34 SOT 16 · 2009 · ITAT
8
citing judgments
Arosan Enterprises Ltd. v. UOI
9 SCC 449 · 1999 · Reported
7
citing judgments
B.K. Jagan & Co. v. CIT
136 Taxmann 343 · 2004 · High Court
6
citing judgments
CIT v. Spice Infotainment Ltd.
426 ITR 613 · 2019 · Supreme Court
5
citing judgments
Mehsana Urban Co-oop Bank Ltd. v. Asst. CIT
451 ITR 510 · 2023 · High Court
5
citing judgments
INCOME- TAX v. DR.K.K.SHAH
135 ITR 146 · 1982 · High Court
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 2(31)

Aditya Birla Private Equity Trust, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (Income Tax Officer 20(1)(1), Mumbai)

Accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 91/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry, Hon'Bleand

Section 1Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Income Tax Officer 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Silverline Trading Company Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2253/MUM/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Kabra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajudiya Manish, DR
Section 144Section 147Section 560Section 560(5)

ITO -2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Silverline Trading Company Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 2234/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Kabra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajudiya Manish, DR
Section 144Section 147Section 560Section 560(5)

M/S Rainawari FIN.and Investment Co.Pvt.Lt vs. Income Tax Officer

ITA/21/2014HC J&K03 Nov 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN LAL,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 560Section 560(5)

M/S Ri Kynjai Serenity by the Lake and Ors vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong and Anr

ITA/1/2019HC Meghalaya06 Jul 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE W. DIENGDOH,HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE (FORMER)

Section 10(26)Section 184Section 2(31)

Air Force Navy Farm Owners Welfare Association, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward -1(1), Noida

ITA 1992/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1992/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 बनाम Air Force Navy Farm Owners Ito Welfare Association, Vs. Ward 1(1) C-2/52, Sector-31, Noida, Noida. Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aaaja0972B अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 167ASection 167BSection 2(31)

Venkateshwar Ispat Limited, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 15/RPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.15/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Venkateshwar Ispat Limited 655-B, Urla Industrial Complex, Raipur-493 221 (C.G.) Pan : Aaacv7829H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

M/S Marlabs Innovations Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 457/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Marlabs Innovations Pvt. Ltd., (Successor Of Marlabs Software Pvt. Ltd.), The Deputy 14Th Floor, Citrine Block-4, Commissioner Of Bagmane World Technology Income Tax, Centre, Circle – 4(1)(2), Marathalli Outer Ring Vs. Bangalore. Road, Mahadevapura, Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan: Aaccm6627Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri L. Bharath, Ca Revenue By : Shri Arun Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 23-06-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13-07-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 28/12/2018 Passed By Ld.Dcit, Circle – 4(1)(2), Bangalore For A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Various Issues On The Transfer Pricing Adjustment Made In Respect Of The International Transactions Between Assessee & Its Ae.

For Appellant: Shri L. Bharath, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(31)Section 394

M/S M/S Sunita Finlease Limited, Raipur, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur, Raipur (Cg)

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

ITA 7/BIL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 07/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Sunita Finlease Limited 2/509, Choubey Colony, Opp. Rajkumar College, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aadcs2759J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prafulla Pendse, Ar Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pendse, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Mamania Family Trust, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 41, Mumbai

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

ITA 308/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A. M. Alankamony, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 308/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07)

For Appellant: None byFor Respondent: Shri C. T. Mathews, Ld. DR by
Section 115WSection 139(1)Section 143(3)

Asst CIT 23 (1), Mumbai vs. M/S Aditya Birla Real Estate Fund, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 7504/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2021AY 2016-17
Section 10Section 10(35)Section 143(1)Section 1O(35)

I2 Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1068/BANG/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Tolani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 391

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

In the result ITA number 4794/del/2015 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2011 – 12 is dismissed

ITA 4794/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Dlf Limited Addl. Cit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Cit Dlf Limited Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Range-10 Vs 404, C. R. Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 4794/del/2015 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2011 – 12 is dismissed

ITA 4159/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Dlf Limited Addl. Cit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Cit Dlf Limited Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Range-10 Vs 404, C. R. Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

M/S. Bangalore Club vs. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax

The appeals are allowed with no order as to costs

C.A. No.-003964-003971 - 2007Supreme Court08 Sept 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE

Section 167ASection 21A

Boeing India Pvt. Ltd (Successor to Boeing International Corporation India Private Limited), New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle- 5(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 9765/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: ShriArvind Datar, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 195Section 2Section 233Section 92C

M/S. Duke Arnics Electronics Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 1564/DEL/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35

Escorts Benefit & Welfare Trust, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(3), Faridabad

The appeal is allowed

ITA 8491/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K.N.Chary

For Appellant: Shri R. M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 115Section 131Section 143(3)Section 160(1)(iv)Section 2(31)Section 292B

Saraswat Hitwardhak Mandal, Mumbai vs. ITO 18 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6944/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman(A.M.) Saraswat Hitwardhak Vs Ito-18(3)(4), Mumbai. Mandal, 1St Floor, Saraswat Bhawan, Chatrapati Shivaji Lane, Mahim, Mumbai – 400 016. Pan : Aagts 2691 M Appellant Respondednt

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 80L

Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur vs. M/S. Rds Construction (Jv), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 623/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.623/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward- 2(2), .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Kolhapur. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Rds Construction (Jv), 363/11, Balaji Niwas, Deep Bunglow Chowk, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411005. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan : Aaaar8625B Revenue By : Shri N. Ashok Babu Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Cit(A)- 2, Pune Dated 09.12.2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are As Under :- “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Holding That No Income Attributable On Contract Receipts Could Be Taxed In The Status Of The Aop. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Justified In Ignoring That The Assessee, Being A Separate Entity U/S 2(31) Of The It Act, 1961 & Having A Pan Should Have Prepared Its Own Profit & Loss Account As Well As The Balance Sheet Reflecting The Full Transactions Undertaken By It & Not Just Showing Apportionment Of Receipts/ Payments & Assets/Liabilities Between Its Members.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri N. Ashok Babu
Section 194CSection 2(31)Section 40
Section 2(31) of the Income Tax Act — Case Laws | BharatTax