Section 61 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.97

Section 61 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 97 (Chargeability of income in transfer of assets) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 97 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 61 is (CIT v. Cochin Co. Pvt. Ltd. (104 ITR 655), cited in 32 of the 82 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 61

(CIT v. Cochin Co. Pvt. Ltd.
104 ITR 655 · 1976 · High Court
32
citing judgments

A protective assessment is permissible when the assessing officer has doubt regarding who is in receipt of income, but a recovery based on a protective assessment is not allowed. If an assessment is intended to be protective, it must be clearly stated as such.

Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asst. CIT
137 Taxmann.com 315 · 2022 · High Court
29
citing judgments

When reopening an assessment, the assessing officer must provide the assessee with a copy of the superior officer's approval, including their comments, name, designation, and date, not merely state the reasons in a letter. This ensures transparency in the reassessment process.

Dayabai v. CIT
154 ITR 248 · 1985 · High Court
20
citing judgments

A protective assessment is permissible only at the initial assessment stage, as higher appellate or revisional authorities can definitively determine the liable assessee.

(CIT v. Khalid Mehdi
165 ITR 685 · 1987 · High Court
18
citing judgments

A protective assessment must be expressly stated as such by the Income Tax Department. It is made out of abundant caution when there is doubt as to who has received the income.

Ex Japan) Analyst Fund (2014) 61 SOT 277 and Capital International Emerging Markets Funs v. DIT
145 ITD 491 · 2013 · ITAT
11
citing judgments

The decision in ADIT vs Legg Mason Sia (Ex Japan) Analyst Fund and Capital International Emerging Markets Funs vs DIT supports the assessee where non-STT paid funds are concerned.

Behramji Sorabji Lalkaka v. CIT
16 ITR 301 · 1948 · High Court
8
citing judgments
Ltd. vs. ADIT (2009) (132 TTJ 218); Fidelity Investment Trust Fidelity Overseas Fund v. ADIT
36 SOT 22 · ITAT
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 61

Imppa Welfare Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption) Ward 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.1999/Mum/2026 is dismissed as having become infructuous, whereas ITA No

ITA 2000/MUM/2026[N.A ]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2026

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 1999/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: N.A.) 2. Ita No. 2000/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: N.A.) Imppa Welfare Trust Ito (Exemptions), Imppa House, Dr. Ward-1(3), Mumbai Ambedkar Road, Vs. Room No. 619, 6Th Bandra (W), Mumbai, Floor, Cumballa Hill Maharashtra-400 050 Mtnl Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400 026 Pan/Gir No. Aaati0713J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mitali Parekh, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri R. A. Dhyani, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, Am: These Two Appeals Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(E)”], Both Dated 18.02.2026, Whereby The Application Of The Assessee-Trust Seeking Renewal Of Registration Under Section 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) & Consequential Application Seeking Approval Under Section 80G Of The Act Came To Be Rejected.Since The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Arise Out Of Common Facts & Were Heard Together, The Same Are Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(i)

Imppa Welfare Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemptions) Ward 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.1999/Mum/2026 is dismissed as having become infructuous, whereas ITA No

ITA 1999/MUM/2026[N.A ]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2026

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 1999/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: N.A.) 2. Ita No. 2000/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: N.A.) Imppa Welfare Trust Ito (Exemptions), Imppa House, Dr. Ward-1(3), Mumbai Ambedkar Road, Vs. Room No. 619, 6Th Bandra (W), Mumbai, Floor, Cumballa Hill Maharashtra-400 050 Mtnl Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400 026 Pan/Gir No. Aaati0713J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mitali Parekh, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri R. A. Dhyani, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, Am: These Two Appeals Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(E)”], Both Dated 18.02.2026, Whereby The Application Of The Assessee-Trust Seeking Renewal Of Registration Under Section 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) & Consequential Application Seeking Approval Under Section 80G Of The Act Came To Be Rejected.Since The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Arise Out Of Common Facts & Were Heard Together, The Same Are Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(i)