← All Phrases

“Section 10(14)(ii)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(14)(ii)14 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 10(14)(ii) is Loyal Motor Service Co. Ltd. v. CIT (14 ITR 647), cited in 48 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 10(14)(ii)

Loyal Motor Service Co. Ltd. v. CIT
14 ITR 647 · 1946 · High Court
48
citing judgments

A payment of bonus or commission is allowable as a business deduction under Section 36(1)(ii) unless it constitutes a distribution of profits or dividends, thereby distinguishing payments genuinely for services from those merely intended to escape taxation.

Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta
14 ITR 100 · 1946 · Reported
26
citing judgments

A rate imposed upon a business owner or occupier, where the quantum is fixed after considering the owner's circumstances including business income, is not assessed on the basis of profits and is therefore allowable as a business expense.

275(Delhi); Pr. CIT v. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corpn Ltd.
143 Taxmann.com 135 · 2022 · High Court
25
citing judgments

Where an expense is incurred for the purpose of acquiring a capital asset, and that asset is subsequently sold, the expenditure must be considered as part of the cost of acquisition of that asset for the purpose of calculating capital gains. This is because the expense forms an integral part of the cost of acquiring the asset, not an expenditure of revenue nature.

Judgments citing Section 10(14)(ii)

Hemant Dahyalal Bhatt, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2012–13 to 2016–17 are allowed, and appeals for assessment years 2017–18 and 2018–19 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7913/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 144Section 153ASection 24

disallowances sustained by the learned CIT(A), which inter alia relate to denial of exemption in respect of medical allowance claimed under section 10(14)(ii), addition of dividend income and capital gains by treating the same as taxable income, disallowance of housing loan interest, addition of interest income ... Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of INR 15,000 on account of medical allowance, which is specifically exempt from tax under Section 10(14) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition

Hemant Dahyalal Bhatt, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2012–13 to 2016–17 are allowed, and appeals for assessment years 2017–18 and 2018–19 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7912/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 144Section 153ASection 24

disallowances sustained by the learned CIT(A), which inter alia relate to denial of exemption in respect of medical allowance claimed under section 10(14)(ii), addition of dividend income and capital gains by treating the same as taxable income, disallowance of housing loan interest, addition of interest income ... Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of INR 15,000 on account of medical allowance, which is specifically exempt from tax under Section 10(14) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition

Hemant Dahyalal Bhatt, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2012–13 to 2016–17 are allowed, and appeals for assessment years 2017–18 and 2018–19 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7911/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 144Section 153ASection 24

disallowances sustained by the learned CIT(A), which inter alia relate to denial of exemption in respect of medical allowance claimed under section 10(14)(ii), addition of dividend income and capital gains by treating the same as taxable income, disallowance of housing loan interest, addition of interest income ... Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of INR 15,000 on account of medical allowance, which is specifically exempt from tax under Section 10(14) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition

Hemant Dahyalal Bhatt, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2012–13 to 2016–17 are allowed, and appeals for assessment years 2017–18 and 2018–19 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7910/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 144Section 153ASection 24

disallowances sustained by the learned CIT(A), which inter alia relate to denial of exemption in respect of medical allowance claimed under section 10(14)(ii), addition of dividend income and capital gains by treating the same as taxable income, disallowance of housing loan interest, addition of interest income ... Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of INR 15,000 on account of medical allowance, which is specifically exempt from tax under Section 10(14) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition

Hemant Dahyalal Bhatt, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2012–13 to 2016–17 are allowed, and appeals for assessment years 2017–18 and 2018–19 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7909/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 144Section 153ASection 24

disallowances sustained by the learned CIT(A), which inter alia relate to denial of exemption in respect of medical allowance claimed under section 10(14)(ii), addition of dividend income and capital gains by treating the same as taxable income, disallowance of housing loan interest, addition of interest income ... Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of INR 15,000 on account of medical allowance, which is specifically exempt from tax under Section 10(14) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition

Hemant Dahyalal Bhatt, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2012–13 to 2016–17 are allowed, and appeals for assessment years 2017–18 and 2018–19 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7908/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 144Section 153ASection 24

disallowances sustained by the learned CIT(A), which inter alia relate to denial of exemption in respect of medical allowance claimed under section 10(14)(ii), addition of dividend income and capital gains by treating the same as taxable income, disallowance of housing loan interest, addition of interest income ... Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of INR 15,000 on account of medical allowance, which is specifically exempt from tax under Section 10(14) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition

Hemant Dahyalal Bhatt, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2012–13 to 2016–17 are allowed, and appeals for assessment years 2017–18 and 2018–19 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7907/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 144Section 153ASection 24

disallowances sustained by the learned CIT(A), which inter alia relate to denial of exemption in respect of medical allowance claimed under section 10(14)(ii), addition of dividend income and capital gains by treating the same as taxable income, disallowance of housing loan interest, addition of interest income ... Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of INR 15,000 on account of medical allowance, which is specifically exempt from tax under Section 10(14) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition

Virender Malik, Sagore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(4), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1810/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 80CSection 80T

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFOREDR.DIPAK P

Virender Malik, Sagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(4), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1809/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 80CSection 80T

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFOREDR.DIPAK P

Raghvendra Singh Thakur, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-4(1), Raipur

The appeal is allowed

ITA 242/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.242/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Raghvendra Singh Thakur, H.No.238, Sarona, Tatibandh, Raipur, 492001, Chhattisgarh Pan: Akbpt7616E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Veekas S. Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(14)(ii)Section 69rSection 80C

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

Rahul Jesmin Seth, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-22(5), Tambaram

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

ITA 307/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K., Vice- & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 307/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rahul Jesmin Seth, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Flat No. Ef, 15Th Floor, Sapphire Non Corporate Ward –22(5), Block K, Olympia Opaline No. 33, Tambaram, Chennai. Omr Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Navallur, Chennai 603 103. [Pan: Bhsps-7395-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 19.03.2025 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated 23.12.2024 Pertains To The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised 18 Grounds Of Appeal, Amongst Which, Besides Challenging The Exparte Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), The Assessee Also Agitated That The Ld. Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Confirming The Additions Of ₹.27,31,000/- Being The Cash Deposits Made In Sbns During The Demonetization Period

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasi Kumar, CIT
Section 10Section 10(14)(ii)Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 17(2)Section 250Section 69

medical allowance of ₹.15,000/- under section 17(2) of the Act. Thus, by allowing conveyance allowance under section 10(14)(ii) of the Act of ₹.19,200/-, the Assessing Officer computed the income from salary at ₹.4,60,800/- against ₹.4,80,000/- claimed by the assessee. 5. Since

Premjeet Singh, Dabha Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 5(3), Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 521/NAG/2024[AY 2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 10Section 10(14)Section 10(14)(i)Section 10(14)(ii)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY

Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward Coimbatore vs. Muthu Kishore, Tiruppur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1288/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1288/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Income Tax Officer Muthu Kishore, V. International Taxation Peelikampati, Soorianallur, Ward, Thayampalayam, Coimbatore. Tiruppur – 638 703. [Pan: Blopk-4850-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Fouad Zubair, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. Fouad Zubair, CA
Section 10(14)(ii)Section 143(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र

DCIT-8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Sapiens Technologies (1982) India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1361/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1361/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit-8(1)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Sapiens Room No. 673, 6Th Floor, Technologies (1982) India Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Pvt. Ltd. Karve Marg, Mumbai- 22, New Pushpamilan, 67, 400020. Worli Hills, Mumbai- 400018. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci8674H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Vani Saxena Revenue By: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, Delhi Dated 24.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Revenue Are As Under: - “(I) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Considering Daily Overseas Allowances Was Paid By The Company Being In The Nature Of Reimbursement Of Expenses Incurred By Employees On Their Business Trip To Overseas. (Ii) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Failed To Consider That The Allowance Are Perquisite Within The Meaning Of Section 17(2) Of The I. T. Act & Hence It Will Be Taxable In India & Assessee Has Failed To Deduct Taxes At Source As Required U/S 40(A)(Iii).”

For Appellant: Ms. Vani SaxenaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 17(2)Section 40

being in the nature of reimbursement of expenses incurred by employees on their business trip to overseas jurisdiction, it will be exempt under section 10(14)(ii) of the Act. In view of this, there was no liability on the appellant to deduct tax at source in respect of overseas