Section 56(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.92

Section 56(2) 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(2) is Global Logic India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (117 Taxmann.com 39), cited in 11 of the 166 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 56(2)

Global Logic India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
117 Taxmann.com 39 · 2020 · Reported
11
citing judgments

A company undergoing restructuring activity during the relevant financial year may be rejected as a comparable in transfer pricing analysis, as such events can impact its profitability.

Prism Cement Ltd. v. JCIT
101 ITD 103 · 2006 · ITAT
10
citing judgments

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) decision in Prism Cement Ltd. v. JCIT (2006) is cited for the proposition that the nature of a transaction involving non-convertible debentures (NCDs) may be distinguished from the forfeiture of a loan when determining tax implications, and that a CIT(A) might err in deleting additions without further inquiry if the apparent is not the real.

CIT(LTU) & Another v. IBM Global Services India Pvt Ltd.
429 ITR 386 · 2020 · High Court
10
citing judgments

If statutory authorities responsible for overseeing a particular Act have not taken any action, the assessing officer cannot allege a violation of that Act.

177 TAXMAN 35 (GUJ) (g) Commissioner of Income-tax-V v. Real Time Marketing (P.) Ltd.
173 Taxmann 41 · 2008 · High Court
9
citing judgments
Khinvasara Investment (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT, SR-5, Pune
110 ITD 198 · 2008 · ITAT
7
citing judgments
JCIT v. Saheli Leasing & Industries Ltd.
324 ITR 170 · 2010 · Supreme Court
7
citing judgments
Vikram Krishna v. PCIT
114 Taxmann.com 197 · 2020 · Supreme Court
6
citing judgments
DepakFertilisers and Petrochemicals Copn. Ltd. v. DCIT
118 ITD 546 · 2009 · ITAT
6
citing judgments
16 (Mum. Trib.) (viii) Hackett Group (India) Ltd. v. DCIT
132 Taxmann.com 220 · 2021 · High Court
6
citing judgments
Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. ACIT(E) 120171
369 ITR 323 · High Court
6
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 56(2)

M/S. Shanti Vyapar Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 9(1), Kolkata

ITA 299/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Saumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)

Sanjay Sharma, Gwalior vs. ITO 3(2), Gwalior, Ayaker Bhavan City Centre

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 25/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 25/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) Shri Sanjay Sharma Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 51, Pg Enclave, Patel Nagar, Ward 3(2), Gwalior. Vs. City Centre, Gwalior (Mp). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aubps-3595-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. S.C. Jain, Ca – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 21-11-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 28-12-2016. The Assessee Provides Services Of Supervision & Quality Control. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Assessed Total Income At Rs.45.48 Lacs After Various Additions / Disallowances. The Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Assessment Against Which The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. The Grievance Of The Assessee Is – (I) Addition Of Unaccounted Expenditure For Rs.20.88 Lacs; (Ii) Addition Of Sundry Creditors U/S 68 For Rs.13.50 Lacs; (Iii) Addition U/S 56(2) For Rs.1.43 Lacs. It Could Also Be Seen That The Assessee Has Not Made Any Representation During First

For Appellant: Sh. S.C. Jain, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 56(2)Section 68

Shivam Sureka, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir. 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different assessee are partly allowed

ITSSA 29/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] I.T.(S.S).A. Nos. 27 & 28/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Aakash Sureka Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 250Section 43(5)Section 56(2)Section 68

Aakash Sureka, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir. 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different assessee are partly allowed

ITSSA 28/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] I.T.(S.S).A. Nos. 27 & 28/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Aakash Sureka Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 250Section 43(5)Section 56(2)Section 68

Aakash Sureka, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir. 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different assessee are partly allowed

ITSSA 27/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] I.T.(S.S).A. Nos. 27 & 28/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Aakash Sureka Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 250Section 43(5)Section 56(2)Section 68

Cecilia Ram Bawale, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai

The appeal of the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1031/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Cecilia Ram Bawale Ito, Ward 12/3, Placid Roadrikas 22(1)(1) Chawl, Near Akash Vs. Mumbai. Darshan Building Vakola, Santacruz-E Mumbai-400 055. Pan : Adipb7697M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh ThakwaniFor Respondent: Shri Yatin Shetty, CA
Section 144Section 50CSection 56(2)Section 56(2)(x)Section 69

Claqyx Securities P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), New Delhi

ITA 1520/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaita No.1517/Del/2023 (Assessment Year 2015-16)

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Krishna Plantations Private Limited, Margao vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

ITA 106/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 106/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Krishna Plantation Private Limited 15/1452, Nanu House, Varde Valaulikar Rd., Madgao, Goa Pan : Aaack6885G . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Madgao, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Smt Bhavya Goyal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01/04/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order 1062943051(1) Dt. 23/04/2024 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 29/01/2021 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt. Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Smt Bhavya Goyal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)

Rabin Arup Mukerjea, Mumbai vs. ITO, Int Tax Ward, 3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on

ITA 5884/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 197Section 55Section 56Section 56(1)(vii)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

Sumitkumar Devchandbhai Savaliya, Bodakdev vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 964/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 2(22)(e)Section 250

SHI vs. Agar Jagdhari Yadav, Suratvs.Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Surat.

ITA 607/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Surat10 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.607/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Shivsagar Jagdhari Yadav, Vs. The Pcit – 1, 11, Maheshwari Society, Opp – Surat Bhagya Laxmi Society, Piplod, Surat - 395002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagpy4572P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/02/2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 50CSection 56Section 56(2)

Lila Tejpal Jain, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Delhi

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

ITA 5927/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 250Section 50CSection 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

Parag Ashokbhai Dhameliya, Thane vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Thane

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

ITA 6155/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Mr. R. A. Dhyani, CIT DR`
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Parag Ashokbhai Dhameliya, Thane vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Thane

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

ITA 6154/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Mr. R. A. Dhyani, CIT DR`
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Parag Ashokbhai Dhameliya, Thane vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Thane

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

ITA 6153/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Mr. R. A. Dhyani, CIT DR`
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Indrayani Seva Samiti Nyas, Pune vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(2), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 828/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 250Section 56(2)

Income Tax Officer Ward 41(1)(3), Mumbai, Income Tax Department vs. Nabi Ahmed Shafi Ahmed Sayed, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 3470/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Praveen B. Shetty, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath, Ld. Sr. A.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

M/S Swift Vintrade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT, Kolkata-1I, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1032/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri A. Kundu, CIT, DR
Section 143Section 148Section 263

Javed Akthar, Pottakuzhi Road Junction Kaloo vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward 1(1), Kochi, Central Revenue Building

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 774/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhjaved Akthar Ito, Non-Corporat Ward 1(1) 44/1074(B6), Pottakuzhi Road C.R. Building, I.S. Press Road Junction, Kaloor Vs. Kochi 682018 Ernakulam 682017 [Pan: Alypa8033C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 250Section 250(6)

ACIT Circle 4.3.1, Mumbai vs. Just Dial Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2020-

ITA 486/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Ms. MokshaFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 250