Section 6 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.6

Section 6 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 6 (Residence in India) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 6 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 6 is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. (342 ITR 169), cited in 658 of the 340 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 6

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.
342 ITR 169 · 2012 · High Court
658
citing judgments

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT
108 ITR 345 · 1977 · Supreme Court
209
citing judgments

Taxing statutes must be interpreted strictly, assuming that the law-making authority does not commit a mistake or make an omission. There is no room for purposive interpretation under direct tax laws.

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT
317 ITR 433 · 2009 · High Court
202
citing judgments

Orders that are inordinately delayed are liable to be recalled and heard afresh, and the Appellate Tribunal President should frame guidelines for timely disposal of appeals.

Parimisetti Seetharamamma v. CIT
57 ITR 532 · 1965 · Supreme Court
142
citing judgments

Not all receipts constitute income chargeable to tax. An Assessing Officer cannot reject a prima facie reasonable explanation on mere probabilities or arbitrary grounds, but must disprove facts.

J.S. Parkar v. V.B. Palekar
94 ITR 616 · 1974 · High Court
58
citing judgments

An assessee found to be the owner of bullion, etc., must explain its source. The Income Tax Officer must find the assessee to be the owner, not merely in possession.

Som Nath Maini v. CIT
306 ITR 414 · 2008 · High Court
38
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer may reject the genuineness of a transaction if the evidence provided by the assessee is not trustworthy, even if the transaction appears to be conducted through cheques or other formal means. The burden of proving the genuineness of a transaction lies primarily on the assessee.

(i) Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP
46 Taxmann.com 100 · 2014 · High Court
32
citing judgments

Issuance of a draft assessment order under section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act is mandatory, and its non-issuance is not a curable procedural lapse.

PILCOM v. CIT
425 ITR 312 · 2010 · Supreme Court
27
citing judgments

Credit for tax deducted at source (TDS) must be granted to the taxpayer even if the income on which TDS was deducted is not taxable in India or if the obligation to deduct tax under a specific section is not affected by a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).

01. Sunsathi Dayal v. CIT (SC)
213 ITR 805 · 1995 · High Court
19
citing judgments

Sums credited in the books of an assessee can be added as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act if the explanation offered regarding their nature and source is not satisfactory.

CIT v. AP Kalyanakrishnan
195 ITR 534 · 1992 · High Court
8
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 6

M/S Yashoda Dealers Pvt Ltd, Howrah vs. D.C.I.T., CC-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1876/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpl Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal(सम" "ी राजपाल यादव उपा"" एवं "ी िगरीश अ"वाल लेखा सद" Assessment Year: 2009-10 Yashoda Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Naschinda, Ghoshpoara, Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle- Bally, Howrah-711227 2(1), Kolkata. (Pan: Aaacy3308C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit-5, Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 14/Cit(A)-5/Cc-2(1)/16-17/Kol Dated 26.07.2019 For A.Y. 2009-10 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 143(3)/147/263/144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Ito, Ward-9(2), Kolkata Dated 31.03.2014. 2. Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit, Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That The Assessee Has Opted For Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (Hereinafter, The ‘Scheme’) & Had Filed Form No. 1 & Form No. 2 Before The Competent Authority & The Competent Authority Had Accepted It & Had Issued Form-3. Thereafter The Assessee Has Remitted The Tax As Per Form 3 & Filed Form No. 4 & The Department Has Also Issued Form-5 In Respect Of Order For Full & Final Settlement

For Appellant: Shri Amit Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sudipta Guha, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 5(2)Section 6

Sunita Jain, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-49(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1845/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 1845/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sunita Jain I.T.O., Ward-49(2), Kolkata 1E, Block Ii,Shriram Nagar Vs Vip Road, Mondal Ganthi Pin-700052 Pan : Aabcd3346C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03/08/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/08/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajpal Yadav: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -15, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 31/07/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. In This Case, The Assessee Has Filed An Application Seeking Withdrawal Of This Appeal On The Ground That The Appeal Has Been Settled Under The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Assessee Has Duly Filed The Copy Of The Certificate In Form 5 For Full & Final Settlement Of Tax Arrear Under Section 5(2) R.W.S. 6 Of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3. Keeping In View These Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Especially The Fact That The Assessee Has Duly Complied With The Necessary Requirements Under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, Permission As Sought By The Assessee Is Granted & This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Dismissed As Withdrawn. 4. In The Result, Appeal Of The Assessee Is Dismissed As Withdrawn. Order Pronounced In The Court On 18Th August, 2022 At Kolkata. (Girish Agrawal) Vice-Kolkata, Dated 18/08/2022 *Sc Srps

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 250Section 5(2)

Shri Kanayalal Raghani, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-8(3), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 974/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Kanayalal Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Aclpr 0122 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Dinesh Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Acrpr 3416 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Dilip Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Acrpr 6566 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Amal Kamat, Cit & Smt. Ranu Biswas, Acit Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2022 O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Filed By Different Assessee’S Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata All Dated 21.02.2019. A.Y. 2014-15 2. In The Captioned Appeals, The Authorised Representative Of The Assessee Has Filed Three Applications Stating That The Appeals Have Been Settled Under The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Assessee Has Duly Filed The Copy Of The Certificate In Form 5 For Full & Final Settlement Of Tax Arrear Under Section 5(2) Read With Section 6 Of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3. Per Contra, The Ld. Dr Did Not Have Any Objection In This Regard.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amal Kamat, CIT & Smt. Ranu Biswas, ACIT
Section 5(2)Section 6

Shri Dilip Raghani, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-8(3), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1256/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Kanayalal Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Aclpr 0122 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Dinesh Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Acrpr 3416 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Dilip Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Acrpr 6566 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Amal Kamat, Cit & Smt. Ranu Biswas, Acit Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2022 O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Filed By Different Assessee’S Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata All Dated 21.02.2019. A.Y. 2014-15 2. In The Captioned Appeals, The Authorised Representative Of The Assessee Has Filed Three Applications Stating That The Appeals Have Been Settled Under The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Assessee Has Duly Filed The Copy Of The Certificate In Form 5 For Full & Final Settlement Of Tax Arrear Under Section 5(2) Read With Section 6 Of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3. Per Contra, The Ld. Dr Did Not Have Any Objection In This Regard.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amal Kamat, CIT & Smt. Ranu Biswas, ACIT
Section 5(2)Section 6

Sri Dinesh Raghani, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-8(3), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 975/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Kanayalal Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Aclpr 0122 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Dinesh Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Acrpr 3416 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Dilip Raghani Ito, Ward-8(3), Kolkata 1St Floor, Siddha Villa, 27, Vs. Marquis Street, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Acrpr 6566 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Amal Kamat, Cit & Smt. Ranu Biswas, Acit Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2022 O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Filed By Different Assessee’S Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata All Dated 21.02.2019. A.Y. 2014-15 2. In The Captioned Appeals, The Authorised Representative Of The Assessee Has Filed Three Applications Stating That The Appeals Have Been Settled Under The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Assessee Has Duly Filed The Copy Of The Certificate In Form 5 For Full & Final Settlement Of Tax Arrear Under Section 5(2) Read With Section 6 Of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3. Per Contra, The Ld. Dr Did Not Have Any Objection In This Regard.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amal Kamat, CIT & Smt. Ranu Biswas, ACIT
Section 5(2)Section 6