VittSphere ONE Calculators Blog CA Firm CA Prabhakar Kumar · FCA · ICAI 560762
Case law › Income-tax Act 2025 › Chapter VI › Section 106
Chapter VIwas s.69D

Section 106 of the Income-tax Act, 2025

Section 106 — Amount borrowed or repaid through negotiable instrument, hundi, etc. Successor to s.69D of the 1961 Act.

Where this section sits

Section 106 is in Chapter VI — Aggregation of Income, which runs from section 101 to section 107.

← Section 105  ·  Section 107 →

What this section does

Sub-section (1) deems an amount to be the income of the person borrowing or repaying it where that amount, including interest on it, is borrowed or repaid through a negotiable instrument or on a hundi otherwise than by an account payee cheque, or through any mode specified by the Board in this behalf. The deemed income falls in the tax year in which the amount was borrowed or repaid, and the sum caught includes the interest paid on the borrowed amount.

Sub-section (2) prevents the same borrowing being taxed twice: where the amount borrowed has already been deemed to be a person's income under sub-section (1), he is not to be assessed again in respect of that amount under that sub-section on its repayment.

Why it is there

Hundi and bearer-instrument lending leaves no traceable record of who advanced the money, so the Act taxes the transaction itself in the hands of the borrower or repayer instead of attempting to trace it. The requirement of an account payee cheque is what makes the difference, forcing the transaction through an identifiable banking channel. Sub-section (2) keeps the deeming from operating twice on a single loan.

Who it applies to

What this means in practice

The charge does not depend on the loan being bogus. A genuine borrowing on a hundi settled by a bearer cheque is caught, because the test is the mode of payment and not the truth of the transaction. Both legs are exposed — borrowing in the year of borrowing, repayment in the year of repayment — with interest paid on the borrowed amount expressly swept in. The only relief is sub-section (2), and it is narrow: it protects the amount borrowed, once deemed income, from being assessed again on repayment under the same sub-section. The escape is at the front end, by using an account payee cheque.

An example

Illustrative only, and invented for this page. The figures are chosen to show the rule biting, not taken from any real matter.

A firm borrows Rs. 20 lakh on a hundi in a tax year, receiving the money by a bearer cheque. Under sub-section (1) the whole Rs. 20 lakh is deemed to be the firm's income for that tax year, even though it is in truth a loan and is shown as a liability in its books. Two years later the firm repays the Rs. 20 lakh with interest of Rs. 3 lakh, again otherwise than by account payee cheque. Sub-section (2) protects the Rs. 20 lakh already assessed from being assessed again on repayment under that sub-section.

Where you meet this section

In an assessment order adding a hundi loan or its repayment as deemed income, usually after the Assessing Officer has traced the mode of receipt or payment through bank records or the books; there is no return schedule or form of its own for it.

The words themselves

the amount so borrowed or repaid (including interest paid on the borrowed amount) shall be deemed to be the income of the person borrowing or repaying
Section 106(1), Income-tax Act, 2025.
such person shall not be liable to be assessed again in respect of such amount under that sub-section on repayment of such amount
Section 106(2), Income-tax Act, 2025.

What people get wrong

What this replaced

The correspondence is the Income Tax Department’s own, from its comparison utility for the 1961 and 2025 Acts. A renumbering is the easy half; whether the words changed is the half that decides cases.

See the full 1961 to 2025 concordance.

Circulars of the Board on this section

A circular binds the department, not you and not a court. Every one below was written under the 1961 Act; it reaches this section because the department’s own concordance carries the provision it names to this one.

See the circulars index.

Case law carried across

Read this before you rely on it. Every decision below was decided under the Income-tax Act, 1961. It appears here because it is tagged to a 1961 provision that the department’s own mapping carries to section 106. That is an inference we have drawn, not a holding on the new section: where the words changed in the move, the reasoning may not survive. Treat this as the place to start looking, not as authority on the 2025 Act.

Explainers

What this page does not tell you. It does not reproduce the section. Everything above was written from the section’s own text as the Income Tax Department publishes it — the text is here, and nothing here is advice on your facts. Where a figure matters, read the sub-section it comes from.