Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.19

Section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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(10B) is CIT v. Ajit Kumar Bose (165 ITR 90), cited in 7 of the 1,303 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10(10B)

CIT v. Ajit Kumar Bose

165 ITR 90 · 1987 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Hindustan Photo Film Workers Welfare Centre (CITU) vs. Government of India

151 DTR 185 · 2017 · Reported

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 10(10B)

Avenindra Dutt Sharma, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 68(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4193/DEL/2026[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Sept 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: AOLPS7330C

Section 10Section 143(1)

Vinaya Vinayak Apte, Kalaburagi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Gulbarga

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2320/BANG/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 10Section 234ASection 250

Vinaya Vinayak Apte, Kalaburagi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Gulbarga

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2319/BANG/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 10Section 234ASection 250

Vadone Krishnamurthy Rao Jamuna, Mysore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mysore

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1847/BANG/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 250

Vadone Krishnamurthy Rao Jamuna, Mysore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mysore

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1846/BANG/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 250

Mahendra Shet, Udupi vs. ITO Ward 1 Tps Udupi, Udupi

In the result, the appeals filed against the dismissal orders of the Ld

ITA 2524/BANG/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan S. & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Hedwig Lawrence Moras, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep S., Addl. CIT-DR

Section 10Section 119(2)(b)

Pushpalatha Aiyappa, Madikeri vs. ITO Ward Madikeri, Madikeri

In the result, the appeals filed against the dismissal orders of the Ld

ITA 2468/BANG/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan S. & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Hedwig Lawrence Moras, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep S., Addl. CIT-DR

Section 10Section 119(2)(b)

Oruganti Sailaja, Bangalore vs. ITO Circle 1(1)(1) Bangalore, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed against the dismissal orders of the Ld

ITA 2441/BANG/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan S. & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Hedwig Lawrence Moras, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep S., Addl. CIT-DR

Section 10Section 119(2)(b)

Mallappa Hanamanthappa Choular, Gulbarga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Gulbarga

In the result, the appeals filed against the dismissal orders of the Ld

ITA 2321/BANG/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan S. & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Hedwig Lawrence Moras, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep S., Addl. CIT-DR

Section 10Section 119(2)(b)

Lata Muralidhar Joshi, Gulbarga vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Gulbarga

In the result, the appeals filed against the dismissal orders of the Ld

ITA 2317/BANG/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan S. & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Hedwig Lawrence Moras, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep S., Addl. CIT-DR

Section 10Section 119(2)(b)

Latchumi, Salem vs. Income Tax Officer, Salem

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes in view of above discussions and observations

ITA 3625/CHNY/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Honourable George George K. & Shri Gagan Goyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3624 & 3625/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Latchumi, V. Income Tax Officer, No.4/87-1, Engineers Colony, Ward-1(6), Jagir Reddipatti, Salem. Jagir Ammapalayam S.O, Salem, Tamil Nadu-636 302. [Pan: Abspl1562H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. A. K. Balasubramanian, C.A, Ld. Ar. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr. R. Raghupathy, Addl. Cit, Ld. Dr. सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Gagan Goyal, Am: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Addl. / Jcit (A)-1, Guwahati (Hereinafter Referred As The Ld. Addl. / Jcit)’), Guwahati Dated 13.04.2026, For The Assessment Years (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ays’) 2020-21 & 2021-22 Respectively.

For Appellant: Mr. A. K. Balasubramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. R. Raghupathy, Addl. CIT

Latchumi, Salem vs. Income Tax Officer, Salem

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes in view of above discussions and observations

ITA 3624/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Honourable George George K. & Shri Gagan Goyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3624 & 3625/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Latchumi, V. Income Tax Officer, No.4/87-1, Engineers Colony, Ward-1(6), Jagir Reddipatti, Salem. Jagir Ammapalayam S.O, Salem, Tamil Nadu-636 302. [Pan: Abspl1562H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. A. K. Balasubramanian, C.A, Ld. Ar. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr. R. Raghupathy, Addl. Cit, Ld. Dr. सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Gagan Goyal, Am: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Addl. / Jcit (A)-1, Guwahati (Hereinafter Referred As The Ld. Addl. / Jcit)’), Guwahati Dated 13.04.2026, For The Assessment Years (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ays’) 2020-21 & 2021-22 Respectively.

For Appellant: Mr. A. K. Balasubramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. R. Raghupathy, Addl. CIT

Pravinkumar Ramjibhai Patel, Gujarat vs. ITO Ward 1, Mehsana

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2312/AHD/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Gohil, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hans Raj Kinchi, Sr. D.R

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154

Rameshbhai Chhotabhai Vankar, Petlad vs. Income Tax Officer, Petlad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1838/AHD/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Pandya, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Deeba Farhat, Sr. D.R

Section 10(108)Section 249(3)Section 250

Mayank Gunvantray Joshi, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad

Accordingly and grant refund due, if any, to the Assessee as per law. Thus, in terms of the aforesaid, Ground raised by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1471/AHD/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Gangadhar Panda

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Mahendrakumar Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Madhulika Satpute, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

Mayank Gunvantray Joshi, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad

Accordingly and grant refund due, if any, to the Assessee as per law. Thus, in terms of the aforesaid, Ground raised by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1470/AHD/2026[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Gangadhar Panda

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Mahendrakumar Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Madhulika Satpute, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

Parashram Khandu Chandre, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

In the result, the above captioned 47 appeals filed by the respective assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 3076/PUN/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsl.

Parashram Khandu Chandre, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

In the result, the above captioned 47 appeals filed by the respective assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 3075/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsl.

Kalpana Dhananjay Kinkar, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

In the result, the above captioned 47 appeals filed by the respective assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 3051/PUN/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsl.

Kalpana Dhanjay Kinkar, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

In the result, the above captioned 47 appeals filed by the respective assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 3050/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsl.