Section 10(10AA)(i) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.19

Section 10(10AA)(i) falls under section 10(10AA) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 19 (Deductions from salaries) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 19 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 10(10AA)(i) is India Ltd. v. ACIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Del) Indian Airlines Ltd. v. ACIT (93 Taxmann.com 89), cited in 64 of the 55 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10(10AA)(i)

India Ltd. v. ACIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Del) Indian Airlines Ltd. v. ACIT
93 Taxmann.com 89 · 2018 · Reported
64
citing judgments

An assessee's bona fide estimate of employee perquisites, by valuing residential accommodation as if employees were of the Central Government, can be accepted.

Kamal Kumar Kalia v. Union of India
268 Taxmann 398 · 2020 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Employees of Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) and nationalized banks are not considered government employees for the purpose of exemption under Section 10(10AA) of the Income Tax Act.

KPTCL Davangere v. ITO
170 ITD 587 · ITAT
12
citing judgments

Employees of a statutory corporation are not considered employees of the State or Central Government, making them ineligible for exemption under Section 10(10AA)(i) and rendering the employer liable for tax deduction at source.

Ram Kanwar Rana v. ITO
159 ITD 431 · ITAT
10
citing judgments

Employees of certain universities, like Haryana Agricultural University and Mahatma Gandhi University, are considered to hold civil posts under the State Government, entitling them to benefits under Section 10(10AA)(i) of the Income Tax Act.

Dr. P. Balasubramanian v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)
142 Taxmann.com 25 · 2022 · High Court
7
citing judgments
Ram Sharan Yadav v. Thakur Muneshwar Nath Singh and Others
4 SCC 649 · 1984 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Trib.), (ii) ITO (TDS) v. Mahatma Gandhi University
177 ITD 508 · ITAT
3
citing judgments
A.K. Bindal v. Union of India
5 SCC 163 · 2003 · Reported
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 10(10AA)(i)

Roshan Lal Goyal, Hisar vs. ITO, Hisar

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4075/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2010-11 Sh. Roshan Lal Goyal Vs. Ito, Ward 3 281, Swastik Hospital Hisar Model Town, Hisar 125 001 Pan: Abcpg 8493 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. V. Raja Kumar, Adv. Respondent By : Sh. B.Ramanjaneyulu, Sr.D.R. Order This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Hisar Dated 23.12.2015 Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11. 1.1. There Is A Delay Of 150 Days In Filing The Appeal. After Perusing The Condonation For Delay Application & The Evidences Filed Therein, I Am Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time. Hence I Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal. 2. The Assessee Is An Employee Of The Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural Unviersity, Hisar & Retired On 31.10.2006. He Received Arrears Of Gratuity Which Was Claimed As Exempt U/S 10(10) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). He Also Received Rs.3,50,000/- As Leave Encashment Which Was Also Claimed As Exempt U/S 10(10) Of The Act. The Assessing Officer (Ao) As Well As The Cit(A) Rejected The Claim Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Assessee Cannot Be Termed As A Government Employee. 3. The Ld.Counsel For The Assessee Relied On A Number Of Coordinate Bench Decisions Of Itat Including

For Appellant: Sh. V. Raja Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. B.Ramanjaneyulu, Sr.D.R
Section 10(10)Section 10(10)(i)