What is the leading case on Section 5(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. Eon Technology P Ltd. (246 CTR 40) is the decision most relied on for Section 5(2)(b), cited in 15 judgments. Foreign commission paid to non-residents is not taxable in India, thus no TDS liability arises on such payments.

Which cases are most cited on Section 5(2)(b)?

CIT v. Eon Technology P Ltd. (246 CTR 40) — 15 citing judgments; DCIT v. Sudipta Maity (96 Taxmann.com 336) — 10 citing judgments; A B Hotel Ltd (Rad Hotel) v. DCIT (25 SOT 368) — 5 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 5(2)(b)?

BharatTax indexes 49 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 5(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 5(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.5

Section 5(2)(b) falls under section 5 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 5 (Scope of total income) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 5 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 5(2)(b) is CIT v. Eon Technology P Ltd. (246 CTR 40), cited in 15 of the 49 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 5(2)(b)

CIT v. Eon Technology P Ltd.

246 CTR 40 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

Foreign commission paid to non-residents is not taxable in India, thus no TDS liability arises on such payments.

DCIT v. Sudipta Maity

96 Taxmann.com 336 · 2018 · Reported

citing judgments

Income derived by a non-resident for performing services in India is taxable in India, even if the payment is received outside India and the individual is not a resident of India, provided the services are rendered within the territorial limits of India.

A B Hotel Ltd (Rad Hotel) v. DCIT

25 SOT 368 · 2008 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 5(2)(b)

DCIT Cir 1, Kalyan vs. Indo Amines Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for assessment years 2010-11 &

ITA 3039/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri Premanand JFor Respondent: Shri M.N. Nandgaokar

Section 195Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

DCIT Cir 1, Kalyan vs. Indo Amines Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for assessment years 2010-11 &

ITA 3038/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri Premanand JFor Respondent: Shri M.N. Nandgaokar

Section 195Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

M/S Balmer Lawries & Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer(It) WD-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 2079/KOL/2014[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. V/S. Income Tax Officer Ltd., 21, N.S.Road, (International Taxation), Kolkata-700 001 Ward-1(1), Aayakar [Pan No. Aabcb 0984 E] Bhawan (Poorva), 2Nd Floor, R. No.215, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata- 700 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri M.K.Poddar, Sr-Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.P.Bhatia, Jcit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-02-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

Section 195Section 201(1)Section 5(2)(b)

ITO WD 3(1), Thane vs. Prasanna M Pujari, Thane

The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed by applying the CBDT Circular dated 10/12/2015(supra)

ITA 4943/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja: Ito, Ward-3(1) Vs Shri Prasanna M. Pujari (Appellant) 102/A, Suryodhaya Apartments, Kopri Colony, Patilwadi, Thane (E), 400 603 (Respondent) Pan : Ahbpp8082F Appellant By : Shri S.R. Kirtane (Dr) Respondent By : None Date Of Hearing : 10/02/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/02/2016

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Kirtane (DR)For Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 5(2)(b)

Columbia Sportswear Company vs. Director of Income Tax, Bangalore

Appeals are disposed of in terms of our order passed in Special Leave

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 31543/2011Supreme Court30 Jul 2012

Bench: The High Court Or U!Article 136 Of The Constitution Before The Supreme Court - Whether The Authority, If Not A Court, Is A Tribunal Within The Meaning Of Expression In Articles 136 & D 227 Of The Constitution & Whether The Authority Has A Duty To Act Judicially & Is Amenable To Writs Of Certiorari & Prohibition U!Article 226 Of The Constitution - Held: The Authority Is A Body Exercising Judicial Power Conferred On It By Chapter Xix-B Of The Act & Is A Tribunal Within The E Meaning Of The Expression In Articles 136 & 227 Of The Constitution - Sub-Section (1) Of S.245S Of The Act, Insofar As, It Makes The Advance Ruling Of The Authority Binding On The Applicant, In Respect Of The Transaction & On The Commissioner & Income-Tax Authorities Subordinate To F Him, Does Not Bar The Jurisdiction Of Supreme Court U/Article 136 Of The Constitution Or The Jurisdiction Of The High Court Ul Articles 226 & 227 Of The Constitution To Entertain A Challenge To The Advance Ruling Of The Authority - It Cannot Be Held That An Advance Ruling Of The Authority Can Only Be G Challenged U!Article 136 Of The Constitution Before Supreme Court & Not U!Articles 226 And/Or 227 Of The Constitution ?Efore The High Court - However, When An Advance Ruling Of He Authority Is Challenged Before The High Court U!Articles 187 H