Section 65 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.100

Section 65 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 100 (Liability of person in respect of income included in income of another person) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 100 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

33 judgments on BharatTax turn on Section 65.

Judgments on Section 65

Ummesalma Huzefa Ghadiali, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 8187/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the Id. CIT

Section 132(4)Section 153C

Ummesalma Huzefa Ghadiali, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 8186/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the Id. CIT

Section 132(4)Section 153C

Bhagwanti Lalitkumar Jain, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 8656/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 143(2)Section 147Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Bhagwanti Lalitkumar Jain, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 8655/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 143(2)Section 147Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Jayantilal Jesaram Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7459/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Hon’Ble Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Nitesh Nath Shah Deo, Ranchi vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Ranchi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 228/RAN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.228/Ran/2025 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Nitesh Nath Shah Deo, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi 489, Aryapuri Near Doordarshan, Ratu Road, Ranchi-834001 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Assps 6604 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vinay Kumar Jalan, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ram Chandra Marndi, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Addl/Jcit(A), Bengaluru, Dated 28.03.2025 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Owns 64 Acres Of Land & The Same Is Ancestral Land. The Assessee Had Claimed Agriculture Income Of Rs.13,20,000/- Which Was Disallowed By The Ao On The Ground That There Was No Proof Of Agriculture Operations Being Done. The Ld. Ar Submitted That Agriculture Operations Are Being Done. Consequently, A Remand Report Had Been Called For From The Ao. After Physical Verification The Ao Has Submitted His Remand Report Which Reads As Follows :-

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kumar Jalan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Chandra Marndi, Sr.DR

Mishra Ganesha Ram, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5556/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 132Section 153CSection 69

Sri Koti Linga Hari Hara Mahakshetram Temple, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption WD, Rajahmundry

ITA 365/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.365/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Sri Koti Linga Hari Hara Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mahakshetram Temple, Exemption Ward, Visakhapatnam. Rajahmundry. Pan: Acgfs3064C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Cr Hemanth Kumar, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 03/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 07/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm :

For Appellant: Sri CR Hemanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 10Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 167BSection 194ASection 250(6)Section 65

Dhanman Jewells Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 950/KOL/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: The Itat With The Following Grounds:

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 65Section 68

Commissioner of Service Tax III Mumbai vs. M/S Vodafone India Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

C.A. No.-010815-010819 - 2014Supreme Court06 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Dahadaya Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., Purba Medinipur vs. ITO, Ward-27(1), Haldia.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 863/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 63Section 64Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Shri Govind Baboorao Rao, Mumbai vs. ITO 42(1)(2), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 632/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Ajudiya, Sr. AR

Section 143(3)Section 49Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2241/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2241/Ahd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Vodafone India Services बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle- Pvt. Ltd. 4(1)(2) Vs. Indiabulls Finance Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Room 1201, 12Th Floor, Tower-1, No.209, Pratyaksh Kar Senapati Bapat Road, Bhavan, Near Elphinstone (West), Polytechnic, Ambawadi, Mumbai-400013. Ahmedabad-380015. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz1849D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Fereshte Sethna (Adv) Revenue By: Letter Dated 11.10.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 10/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad Dated 31.08.2018, Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3)/144C(13) Dated 05.12.2014 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. In The Several Grounds Raised In The Appeal, The Sole Grievance Of The Appellant Is Against The Action Of The Ao/Ld. Cit(A) In Not Allowing The Depreciation Claimed On Goodwill.

For Appellant: Ms. Fereshte Sethna (Adv)For Respondent: Letter dated 11.10.2023

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 92C

M/S. Tata Motors Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes(Spl)

In the result, appellants-dealer/assessee are liable to pay sales tax under

C.A. No.-001822-001822 - 2007Supreme Court15 May 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

M/S. Total Environment Building Systems Pvt Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

C.A. No.-008673-008684 - 2013Supreme Court02 Aug 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Section 65(105)(zzzza)

Smt. Manish Jaitha, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 26 (1), Mumbai

ITA 384/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodita Nos.342 To 345/Mum/2020 Ita Nos.384 To 388/Mum/2020 (Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2013-14) Smt. Manisha Jaitha Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, 2B, Brighton No. 2, 68-D Circle 26(1), 1St Floor , Room No. 107, Rungta Lane, Vs. Nepean Sea Road Piramal Chambers, Parel Mumbai – 400 006 Mumbai – 400 012

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh P. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(c)

Smt.Manisha Jaitha, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 26 (1), Mumbai

ITA 342/MUM/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh P. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(c)

Satya Hari Samvi, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 46(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 606/KOL/2017[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2020AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. Arjunlalsaini, Am] Assessment Year: 1998-99 Satyaharisamui Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-46(4), (Pan: Alaps2193R) Kolkata Appellant Respondent

Section 147Section 65Section 69A

Smt Kamala vs. Smt V Sharada

In the result, the petition is disposed of

WP/39931/2018HC Karnataka10 Dec 2018

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Alok Aradhe

Section 143Section 151Section 63Section 65

Shri Surendra Singh Naruka, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter

ITA 18/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K. L. MoolchandaniFor Respondent: Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT)

Section 148Section 48Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)