← All Phrases

“Section 10(21)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(21)25 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 10(21) is Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 19.12 In Pr. CIT v. Vinita Chaurasia (394 ITR 758), cited in 71 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 10(21)

Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 19.12 In Pr. CIT v. Vinita Chaurasia
394 ITR 758 · 2017 · High Court
71
citing judgments

The amended provisions of Section 153C require that documents found during a search must 'pertain to' or 'relate to' the assessee. The High Court held that this requirement does not apply to searches conducted prior to the amendment.

Janki Ram Bahadur Ram v. CIT
57 ITR 21 · 1965 · Supreme Court
67
citing judgments

The onus is on the Income Tax Department to prove that a particular receipt or amount is taxable and falls under the provisions of the Income-tax Act.

Welham Boys' School Society v. CBDT
285 ITR 74 · 2006 · High Court
36
citing judgments

An order passed by the CIT under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act is quasi-judicial. Until October 1, 2004, there was no express provision in the Act for the CIT to cancel a registration certificate once granted.

ITO v. Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (
21 SOT 79 · 2008 · ITAT
20
citing judgments

Receipts that are not income in nature should be excluded from the profit and loss account before computing Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) under section 115JB.

Para 21, 22, 24, 25, 26 10. Magotteaux International SA v. DCIT
141 Taxmann.com 8 · 2022 · Reported
13
citing judgments

Fees for computer software and technical services are taxable as fees for technical services under the Income Tax Act and are not royalties, unless the software is embedded with an enduring benefit and is integral to the business.

80 ITR 21 9. 10. CIT v. Shrikishan Chandmal (Madhya Pradesh HC) 60 ITR 303 11. CIT v. R. Dalmia (Delhi HC)
162 ITR 373 · 1986 · Supreme Court
10
citing judgments

The character of an amount received as income is not conclusively determined by how it is assessed under the Income Tax Act. The head of income enumerated in Section 14 of the Act does not define the essential characteristics of income.

Judgments citing Section 10(21)

Dadasaheb Tirodkar Shaikshanik Academy, Sindhudurg vs. Itod Exemption Ward, Kolhapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1016/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1016/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 | Dadasaheb Tirodkar V | The Income Tax Officer, Shaikshanik Academy, S Exemption Ward, Pandurtitha Pandur, Kudal, Kolhapur. Maharashtra. Sindhudurg - 416520. Pan: Aactd5657Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Revenue By Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement Shri Nikhil Pathak & Shri Mayuresh Doshi – Ar'S Shri Eknath Abhang –Addl.Cit(Dr) 23/07/2025 30/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Udaipur Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 27.02.2025, Emanating From Order U/S.154 R.W.S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 09.07.2024. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 10Section 10(21)Section 10(228)Section 10(24)Section 10(46)Section 10(47)Section 11Section 11(3)Section 13ASection 13B

under any clause, other than thosc at 8 and 9, of section 10 10 11 Income chargeable under section 11(3) read with section 10(21) 11 12 COME Income claimed/ exempt under section 13A or 13B in case of a Political Party or Electoral Trust (Fill Schedule

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Society for Applied Microwave Electronic Engineering Research Bombay, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1427/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Society For Applied Microwave Tax (Exemptions)-2(1), Electronic Engineering Room No.608, 6Th Floor, Mtnl Research Bombay Vs. Peddar Road, Cumbala Hill, Iit Campus, Hill Slde, Powai, Mumbai-400 026 Mumbai-400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalas5825K Assessee By : Ms. Ritu Panjabi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.06.2024 26.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Panjabi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR
Section 10(21)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

activities of the assessee are pure research work, the assessee is required to be taxed and assessed under Section 10(21) of the Act subject to fulfillment of conditions. It was noticed that assessee claiming it to be an autonomous research and development institute under the control of department ... from Ministry of Science and Technology for availing Custom Duty Exemption and on the same line assessee should have applied for exemption under Section 10(21) of the Act. Further, to avail the benefit of Section 10(21) of the Act the assessee should have been approved under that Section