Section 56(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.92

Section 56(1) falls under section 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 92 (Income from other sources) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 92 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 56(1) is Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona (89 Taxmann.com 127), cited in 130 of the 131 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 56(1)

Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona
89 Taxmann.com 127 · 2018 · Supreme Court
130
citing judgments

The claim of depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act for assets used by charitable trusts is permissible, affirming the Bombay High Court's view that such a claim does not amount to a 'double benefit'.

CIT v. Nirbheram Deluram
91 Taxmann 181 · 1997 · Supreme Court
35
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) can make enhancements to an assessment during appellate proceedings, provided such enhancements do not amount to introducing an entirely new head of income.

DIT v. Vishwa Jagriti Mission
262 CTR 558 · 2013 · High Court
19
citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on capital assets for charitable trusts even if expenditure was allowed as deduction, as long as it doesn't amount to double deduction. The principles of commercial accountancy apply when computing business income.

Mahimananda Mishra v. ACIT
343 ITR 350 · 2012 · High Court
13
citing judgments

Deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) is taxable in the hands of an individual shareholder, not in the hands of a firm in which the shareholder is a partner, if the firm itself is not a shareholder in the lending company.

CIT v. Nirbheram Deluram
297 ITR 72 · 2008 · High Court
7
citing judgments
CIT v. Allahabad Bank Ltd.
73 ITR 745 · 1969 · Supreme Court
7
citing judgments
Commissioner of 563, Bhopal Fire & General Insurance Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax
53 ITR 108 · 1964 · Supreme Court
5
citing judgments
CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry
251 ITR 868 · 2001 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 56(1)

Karnail Singh, Uk vs. JCIT (OSD) Intl. Taxation, Circle, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1232/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 274Section 90

Karnail Singh, Uk vs. JCIT (OSD) Intl. Taxation, Circle, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1231/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 274Section 90

Karnail Singh vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 474/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

Karnail Singh vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 473/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

Karnail Singh vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 472/CHANDI/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

Karnail Singh vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 471/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

Karnail Singh vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 470/CHANDI/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

Karnail Singh vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 469/CHANDI/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Tracom Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4754/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Jagdish JangidFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(1)

DCIT 1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Green Infra Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7529/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vartik ChoksiFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Kardam
Section 250Section 260ASection 56(1)Section 61Section 78(2)

Suchetan Commercial & Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 2 (3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6575/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 56(1)

Suchetan Commercial & Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 2 (3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6574/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 56(1)

Shri Tarsem Singh, Hoshiarpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated as above

ITA 292/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 56(1)

ITO, Ward - 34(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Godhuli Dealcom LLP, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2307/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)

ACIT- 14 (1) (2), Mumbai vs. Urjankur Shree Tatyasaheb Kore Warna Power Co, Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground nos

ITA 1420/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Kabra, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None
Section 14Section 56(1)

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. M/S Motisons Enterainment India Pvt. Ltd

The appeal is allowed in aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs

C.A. No.-001893-001893 - 2022Supreme Court07 Mar 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 56(1)

25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Range -6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 3085/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2798/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2012-13) Ito, Range-6(3)(1) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Room No.524, 5Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower 400020. Parel, Mumbai-400013. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3085/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Range-6(3)(1) 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Room No.524, 5Th Floor, Vs. N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Parel, Mumbai-400013. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz2076J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala & Madhur Aggarwal Revenue By: Shri Achal Sharma (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm): The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2012-13. Ita. No.2798/Mum/2018 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai Relevant To The A.Y.2012-13. 3085/M/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala & MadhurFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 56(1)

ITO 6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. 25 Fps Media Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2798/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2798/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2012-13) Ito, Range-6(3)(1) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Room No.524, 5Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower 400020. Parel, Mumbai-400013. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3085/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Range-6(3)(1) 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Room No.524, 5Th Floor, Vs. N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Parel, Mumbai-400013. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz2076J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala & Madhur Aggarwal Revenue By: Shri Achal Sharma (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm): The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2012-13. Ita. No.2798/Mum/2018 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai Relevant To The A.Y.2012-13. 3085/M/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala & MadhurFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 56(1)

Jagmandri Finvest P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeals are dismissed as time barred

ITA 7392/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2022AY 2008-09
Section 133(6)Section 14Section 14ASection 56(1)Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69B

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-19(1), Mumbai vs. Balaji Trust, Mumbai

ITA 5139/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Senior Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Chhotaray a/w
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(1)Section 2(24)Section 56(1)Section 56(2)(vii)