Section 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.19

Section 10(10C) 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(10C) is CIT v. Bank of Tokyo Ltd. (71 Taxmann 85), cited in 30 of the 899 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10(10C)

CIT v. Bank of Tokyo Ltd.
71 Taxmann 85 · 1993 · High Court
30
citing judgments

The refund of guarantee commission for the unexpired period of a guarantee contract, where the contract is revoked prematurely, is a valid deduction for the assessee-bank.

CIT v. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd.
239 ITR 505 · 1999 · Supreme Court
25
citing judgments

Statutory liabilities, like customs duty, are deductible only in the year they are actually paid, regardless of the assessee's accounting method, as per Section 43B.

SSPDL Ltd vs. DCIT, 33 TAXMANN.COM 447. 4) CIT v. Suzlon Energy Ltd., 33
32 Taxmann.com 276 · 2013 · High Court
15
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot make additions under Section 14A concerning investments in shares if the investment was not made for future benefit and was intended for business purposes.

En-vision Enviro Engineers (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, Circle-1, Surat
150 TTJ 621 · 2012 · ITAT
12
citing judgments

Engaging in the treatment of bio-medical waste qualifies as maintaining or developing an eligible infrastructural facility under Section 80IA(4) for availing deductions.

R 217 (Delhi) (HC) 2. National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. v. CIT
393 ITR 666 · 2017 · High Court
12
citing judgments

A liability incurred by an assessee, even if disputed, is deductible in the year it is incurred and becomes enforceable, such as through an arbitration award or court decree, regardless of subsequent legal challenges or stays.

105 Taxman 256 (Del.) 6. DCIT v. Warner Lambert (I) Pvt. Ltd.
143 TTJ 571 · 2012 · ITAT
8
citing judgments
Synergy Waste Management (P) Ltd. v. The ACIl: Hisar
88 Taxmann.com 405 · 2017 · High Court
8
citing judgments
CIT v. Ajit Kumar Bose
165 ITR 90 · 1987 · High Court
7
citing judgments
Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. CIT
210 ITR 358 · 1994 · Reported
5
citing judgments
Surat District Coop. Bank Ltd. v. ACIT
152 Taxmann.com 549 · Reported
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 10(10C)

Sarvodaya Mutual Benefit Trust, Perrnamallur, Vandavasi vs. ITO, Vellore

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

ITA 1438/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1437/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Sarvodaya Mutual Benefit Vs The Income Tax Officer, Trust, Ward-I(5), No.10, Reddiyar Street, Vellore – 632 001. Thellar Village Post, Tiruvannamalai – 604 406. Pan: Aaets 2748F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1438/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Sarvodaya Mutual Benefit Vs The Income Tax Officer, Trust, Ward-I(5), No.77, Chetpet Road, Vellore – 632 001. Mazhiyur Village, Mazhiyur – 604 502 Vandavasi Taluk. Pan: Aaets 5150R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri K. Venkatesh Prabhu, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08.12.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Appeals By The Assessees Are Arising Out Of Different Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai In Ita No.125/Cit(A)-13/2009-10 & 126/Cit(A)-13/2009-10, Vide Orders Dated 23.02.2016 & 29.03.2016. The Assessments Were Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-I(5), Vellore For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Vide Even Dated 26.12.2011 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri K. Venkatesh Prabhu, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 164(1)

Sarvodaya Mutual Benefit Trust, Thellar, Tiruvannamalai vs. ITO, Vellore

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

ITA 1437/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1437/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Sarvodaya Mutual Benefit Vs The Income Tax Officer, Trust, Ward-I(5), No.10, Reddiyar Street, Vellore – 632 001. Thellar Village Post, Tiruvannamalai – 604 406. Pan: Aaets 2748F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1438/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Sarvodaya Mutual Benefit Vs The Income Tax Officer, Trust, Ward-I(5), No.77, Chetpet Road, Vellore – 632 001. Mazhiyur Village, Mazhiyur – 604 502 Vandavasi Taluk. Pan: Aaets 5150R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri K. Venkatesh Prabhu, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08.12.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Appeals By The Assessees Are Arising Out Of Different Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai In Ita No.125/Cit(A)-13/2009-10 & 126/Cit(A)-13/2009-10, Vide Orders Dated 23.02.2016 & 29.03.2016. The Assessments Were Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-I(5), Vellore For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Vide Even Dated 26.12.2011 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri K. Venkatesh Prabhu, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 164(1)

Sh. Ranjeet Singh Khurana, New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 2628/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ranjeet Singh Khurana, Vs. Cit, C/O. Rattan Lal & Associates, Ca, Delhi-Xv, 109-Wing-1, Hans Bhawan, New Delhi. 1-Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. (Pan: Aghpk6075E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Kapil Goel, Adv. Department By: Shri N.C. Swain, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14 .07.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 16:08.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Assessee Has Questioned Revisional Order Passed By Learned Cit On The Following Grounds: 1. That The Learned Cit-Xv, New Delhi Has Erred In Law & Facts Of The Case In Passing The Order Dated 03.03.2011 Under Sec. 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. The Order Of Assessment Made Under Sec. 143(3) Dated 16.10.2008 At Income Of Rs.1,17,391 Was Not Erroneous Order, Therefore, The Action Of The Learned Cit-Xv, New Delhi Under Sec. 263 Is Uncalled For & The Order Passed U/S. 263 Deserved To Be Cancelled. 2. That The Learned Cit-Xv, New Delhi Has Wrongly & Illegally Directed The Assessing Officer To Make Addition Of Rs.5,00,000 In 2 The Income Of The Assessee By Not Allowing Exemption Of Rs.5,00,000 Under Sec. 10(10C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Righty Allowed By The Assessing Officer In His Order Dated 16.10.2008 Passed Under Sec. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard & Considered The Arguments Advanced By The Parties In View Of Orders Of The Authorities Below, Material Available On Record & The Decisions Relied Upon.

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.C. Swain, CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 263