Which cases are most cited on Section 44B?

CIT v. PKN (60 ITR 65) — 23 citing judgments; Anand Transport (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (370 ITR 524) — 8 citing judgments; Director Of Income-tax (International Taxation) v. Balaji Shipping U.K Ltd. (211 Taxmann 535) — 7 citing judgments; CIT v. Balaji Shipping (UK) Ltd. (24 Taxmann.com 229) — 6 citing judgments; 359 (Guj.) (ii) APL CO. Pte. Ltd. v. ADIT (IT) (156 Taxmann.com 530) — 5 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 44B?

BharatTax indexes 106 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 44B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 44B of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 44B of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. PKN (60 ITR 65) is the decision most relied on for Section 44B, cited in 23 judgments. A purchase made without the intention to resell, where a resale occurs due to changed circumstances, is considered a realization of capital and does not make the transaction a business venture. However, if a purchase is made with the intention to resell, the nature of the venture (capital account or trade) depends on the assessee's conduct and case circumstances.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.61

Section 44B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 61 (Special provision for computation of income on presumptive basis in respect of certain business activities of certain non-residents) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 61 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 44B is CIT v. PKN (60 ITR 65), cited in 23 of the 106 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 44B

CIT v. PKN

60 ITR 65 · 1966 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A purchase made without the intention to resell, where a resale occurs due to changed circumstances, is considered a realization of capital and does not make the transaction a business venture. However, if a purchase is made with the intention to resell, the nature of the venture (capital account or trade) depends on the assessee's conduct and case circumstances.

Anand Transport (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT

370 ITR 524 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

Director Of Income-tax (International Taxation) v. Balaji Shipping U.K Ltd.

211 Taxmann 535 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Balaji Shipping (UK) Ltd.

24 Taxmann.com 229 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

359 (Guj.) (ii) APL CO. Pte. Ltd. v. ADIT (IT)

156 Taxmann.com 530 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

MT Maersk Mikage v. DIT(lnternational Taxation! I

72 Taxmann.com 359 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 44B

Pacific International Lines P Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT International Taxation-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assesses are allowed

ITTPA 59/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 44B

M/S. Bengal Tiger Line Pte Ltd, Singapore vs. DCIT, Intl Tax 1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1419/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Ragunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1419/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Bengal Tiger Line Pte Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of 200, Cantonment Road, V. Income Tax, 13 01, South Point, International Taxation -1(1), Singapore. No. 16, Greams Road, [Pan: Aadcb-6864-F] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2024

For Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 133Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 44B

Mr. Palanisamy Senthilkumar, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Tirupur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1601/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1601/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2018-2019 Shri. Palanisamy Senthilkumar, The Income Tax Officer, 73/1, Selvakumar Rice Mill, Vs. Ward 2(1) Mangalam Road, Tirupur 641 601. Andipalayam, Tirupur 641 687. [Pan: Bwups 6975B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. J. Vamini, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Mr. D. Hema Bhupal, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.03.2024. घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1054384098 (1) Dated 15.07.2023. The Assessment Was Framed By The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income 2 Tax/ Income-Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 143(3A) & 143(3B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Vide Order Dated 03.04.2021. 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regard To Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income (Appeals) (In Short ‘’Ld. Cit(A)’’) Sustaining/ Restricting The Addition At Rs.73,99,559/- As Against Addition Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer At Rs.2,42,58,153/- In Regard To Disallowance Of Expenditure Being Payment Of Commission & Brokerage Made To Contractors U/S.69C Of The Act Being Unexplained Expenditure.

For Appellant: Ms. J. Vamini, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. D. Hema Bhupal, IRS, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 44BSection 68Section 69C

Nan Lian Ship Management Llc, Mumbai vs. JCIT (OSD)(Int Tax)-3(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 976/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blenan Lian Ship Management Llc V. Jcit (Osd) (Intl. Tax) – 3(3)(1) 303, The Atrium Center Room No. 1630, 16Th Floor Khalid Bin Al Walled Road Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Bur Dubai Po Box No. 82289 Dubai, Uae Nan Lian Ship Management Llc C/O. Nishit M. Gandhi Chambers 2 & 3, Ground Floor Cosmos Trade Place, Khatau Building Alkesh Dinesh Mody Marg Opp. Bombay Stock Exchange Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aagcn0478E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 172Section 44BSection 9(1)(vi)

Tata Nyk Shipping Pte Ltd, Singapore vs. DCIT, Int.Tax. Circle-3(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1766/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anshuman Pattnaik, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 263Section 44B

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Korea Marine Transport Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2861/MUM/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2023AY 2016-2017

For Appellant: Shri Sandesh DesaiFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash (Sr

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 44B

Cma Cgm Sa, Mumbai vs. Dy.Commm of Income Tax (International Taxationa)-2(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1820/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1820/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) बिधम/ Cma Cgm Sa Dcit, (International C/O Cma Cgm Agencies Taxation) Circle-2(1)(1) Vs. Room No. 1713, 17Th (India) Pvt. Ltd. One International Center, Floor, Air India Building, Tower 3, 8Th Floor, Senapati Nariman Point, Mumbai- Bapat Marg, Elphinstone 400021. Road West, Mumbai- 400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc9048G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Poojari/Jasmin Amalsadvala Revenue By: Shri Milind Chavan (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Dated 19/05/2021, Passed Under Section 143(3) R/W Section 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), Pursuant To The Directions Dated 12/05/2021, Issued By The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (“Ld. Drp”) Under Section 144C(5) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year 2018–19. 2. In This Appeal, Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: “General 1. Erred In Assessing The Total Income Of The Appellant At Inr 46,94,25,922/- As Against Revised Income Of Inr 52,35,195/- As Per Revised Computation Submitted By The Appellant During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings;

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Poojari/JasminFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 44B

Nan Lion Ship Management Llc, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) -3(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1857/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1857/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Acit (Int. Tax) – 3(3)(1), Nan Lian Ship Management 1630, 16Th Floor, Air India Llc Building Nariman Point, C/O- Chamber 2 & 3, Cosmos बिधम/ Mumbai-400 021 Trade Place, Ground Floor, Vs. Khatu Building, Opp-Bse, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aagcn0478E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Nishit Gandhi /Dhanlaxmi Iyer, Ld. Ars प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Das, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 03.11.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 27.05.2022, Passed By Ld. Ao U/S 2

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Das

Section 144C(5)Section 2Section 44BSection 9(1)(vi)

Cma Cgm Sa, Mumbai vs. Asstt CIT (International Taxationa)-2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, additional grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1013/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Lovish Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270ASection 44B

Orient Overseas Container Line Limited, Mumbai vs. Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax)-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 826/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleorient Overseas Container Line Limited V. Dcit(It)-3(2)(2) C/O. Oocl (India) Private Limited 16Th Floor Icc Chambers, 5Th Floor Air India Building Saki Vihar Road, Opp. Santogen Silk Mills Nariman Point Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaaco5679E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Tiwari Department By : Ms. Bharati Singh

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Ms. Bharati Singh

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 154Section 234CSection 44B

Anl Singapore Pte Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxationa)-1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1014/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Us Is A Company Incorporated In & Fiscally Domiciled In, The Republic Of Singapore & Is Engaged In The Shipping Business. The Assessee Had Earnd An Inland Haulage Charges Of Rs 13,32,16,141 Which Was Not Offered To Tax. When, During The Course Of The Assessment Proceedings, It Was Put To The Assessee As To Why The Said Income Not Be Brought To Tax In The Hands Of The Assessee, It Was, Inter Alia, Submitted By The Assessee As Follows: Assessment Year: 2017-18 Page 2 Of 5

Section 143(3)

Avana Global Fzco, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxation) Circle-1(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1079/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.1079/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2017-18) Avana Global Fzco, D-301-305, Level 3, Tower Ii, Seawoods Grand Central, Plot No.R1, Sector-40, Nerul Node Seawoodsdarave, Navi Mumbai 400 706. Pan: Aadcb-4021-A ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax- (International Taxation),Circle – 1(1)(2) Mumbai, Room No.528, 5Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 .....""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Poras Kaka, Sr. Advocate With Shri Divesh Chawla, Advocate ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Milind S. Chavan सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 22/03/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 16/06/2022 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Poras Kaka, Sr. Advocate with Shri Divesh Chawla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Milind S. Chavan

Section 44B

Hapag-Lloyd Ag, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (International Taxation)-2(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with above directions

ITA 972/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Hapag-Lloyd Ag The Dy. Commissioner Of C/O Hapag-Lloyd India Pvt. Income-Tax (International Ltd. Taxation), Range -2(2)(2), Room No. 1606, 16 Th Floor, 403 & 404, Satellite Gazebo, Vs. A Wing, 4Th Floor, Guru Air India Building, Nariman Hargoindji Marg, Andheri Point, Mumbai-400 021 (East), Mumbai-400 093 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aacfe7262L Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Advocates, Revenue By : Shri Milind Chavan, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Nishant ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, DR

Section 143Section 234Section 270Section 270ASection 44BSection 90(2)

Orient Overseas Container, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (Intl. Taxation)-3(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 29/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleorient Overseas Vs. Dcit (It) – 3(2)(2) Container Line Ltd, Rm No. 1615, 16Th Icc Chambers, 5Th Floor, Air India, Bldg, Floor, Saki Vihar Road, Nariman Point, Opp. Santogen Silk Mumbai – 400 021. Mills, Powai, Mumbai – 400 072. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco5679E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari. ARFor Respondent: Shir Milind Chavan. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 44BSection 44B(1)Section 44B(2)