← All Phrases

“Section 10(10)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(10)36 judgments

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

Leading authorities on Section 10(10)

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.

(Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd.
103 Taxmann.com 48 · 2019 · Supreme Court
696
citing judgments

When assessing cash credits, share capital, or loans, the assessee bears the onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions. This burden is not discharged merely by documentary evidence if field inquiries reveal accommodation entries or dealings with paper/shell companies.

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.

Judgments citing Section 10(10)

Sri Bidyadhar Das, Balasore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Balasore

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

ITA 761/CTK/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.761/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-2020) Vs Ito Ward-1, Balasore Sri Bidyadhar Das, Kantabania, Shyamsundarpur, Balasore-765040 Pan No. :Aixpd 2899 P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Somanath Sahoo, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/02/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 28.10.2025 For The Assessment Year 2019-2020. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Is A Retired Person From Indian Army, Who Retired On 31.05.2018 During The Financial Year 2018-2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-2020. It Was The Submission That The Retirement Benefits Received By The Assessee Are Exempt From The Tax U/S.10(10) Of The Act But Due To Non-Compliance Of The Notice Issued By The Ld. Ao, The Assessment Has Been Completed Ex- Parte U/S.147 R.W.S.144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act. It Was The Prayer That The Matter May Be Restored To The File Of The Ao To Decide The Issue

For Appellant: Shri Somanath Sahoo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr. DR
Section 10(10)Section 144BSection 147

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL