← All Phrases

“Section 10(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(1)218 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 10(1) is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 10(1)

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.
366 ITR 505 · 2014 · High Court
1,261
citing judgments

When an assessee possesses interest-free funds sufficient to cover investments yielding tax-free income, it is presumed that such investments were made from these interest-free funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A.

CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd.
332 ITR 167 · 2011 · High Court
897
citing judgments

The Commissioner cannot revise an assessment under Section 263 merely because the assessment order does not explicitly reflect an inquiry, or because the Commissioner holds a different opinion. An inquiry, even if considered inadequate, or an assessment based on a plausible view by the Assessing Officer after due examination, does not automatically make the order erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
82 Taxmann.com 415 · 2017 · High Court
789
citing judgments

Disallowance computed under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot be added to book profits under Section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes. Additionally, for Section 14A disallowance, only investments that yielded exempt income during the year are considered for calculating their average value.

CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.
326 ITR 1 · 2010 · Supreme Court
543
citing judgments

For attracting Section 14A disallowance, there must be a proximate cause relating the expenditure to actual tax-exempt income, and such disallowance is not automatic but requires positive material. Additionally, Section 94(7) on dividend stripping only ignores losses to the extent of dividend received for assessment years post-April 1, 2002, allowing the remaining loss.

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court
524
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd.
323 ITR 518 · 2010 · High Court
470
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A, for expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income, is not permissible when the assessee has not earned any exempt income, such as dividend income under Section 10(34), during the year under consideration.

PCIT v. Swati Bajaj
139 Taxmann.com 352 · 2022 · High Court
443
citing judgments

Tax authorities are entitled to examine surrounding circumstances and apply the test of human probabilities to determine the genuineness of long-term capital gains arising from the sale of manipulated penny stock, even if prima facie documents appear to support the transaction.

Judgments citing Section 10(1)

Axis Agri Services, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1043/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250

convenience. The primary point of dispute across all the assessment years relates to the treatment of agricultural income claimed as exempt under section 10(1) of the Act, which was subjected to scrutiny and additions by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as “AO”]. Facts of the Case ... activities, specifically growing hybrid seeds for BT cotton. In each year under consideration, the assessee declared NIL income, claiming exempt agricultural income under section 10(1) of the Act. The cases were selected for scrutiny due to large agricultural income flagged either under the Thematic Assessment Model or CASS. During

Axis Agri Services, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1042/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250

convenience. The primary point of dispute across all the assessment years relates to the treatment of agricultural income claimed as exempt under section 10(1) of the Act, which was subjected to scrutiny and additions by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as “AO”]. Facts of the Case ... activities, specifically growing hybrid seeds for BT cotton. In each year under consideration, the assessee declared NIL income, claiming exempt agricultural income under section 10(1) of the Act. The cases were selected for scrutiny due to large agricultural income flagged either under the Thematic Assessment Model or CASS. During

Axis Agri Services, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1041/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250

convenience. The primary point of dispute across all the assessment years relates to the treatment of agricultural income claimed as exempt under section 10(1) of the Act, which was subjected to scrutiny and additions by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as “AO”]. Facts of the Case ... activities, specifically growing hybrid seeds for BT cotton. In each year under consideration, the assessee declared NIL income, claiming exempt agricultural income under section 10(1) of the Act. The cases were selected for scrutiny due to large agricultural income flagged either under the Thematic Assessment Model or CASS. During