Section 10(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.11

Section 10(2) falls under section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 11 (Incomes not included in total income) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 11 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(2) is Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. v. CIT (26 ITR 151), cited in 108 of the 37 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10(2)

Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. v. CIT
26 ITR 151 · 1954 · High Court
108
citing judgments

Revenue expenditure incurred after a business is set up and ready to commence, but before its actual commencement, is allowable as a deduction even if no income is earned in that period. The previous year for a business begins from the date it is set up.

Citation: CIT v. M. Yesodha
351 ITR 265 · 2013 · High Court
42
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271D for cash loans in contravention of Section 269SS is not leviable when transactions are genuine and bonafide. This is particularly applicable for transactions between close relatives where a reasonable explanation exists for not using an account payee cheque or DD.

CIT v. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd.
343 ITR 245 · 2012 · High Court
37
citing judgments

Loss arising from non-recovery of loans given to employees is treated as a loss incidental to business activity, making any interest on such loans fall within the purview of business income, not income from other sources.

210 (Del.), CIT v. M/s Excel Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (201
292 ITR 345 · 2007 · High Court
31
citing judgments

For a bad debt to be allowed as a write-off, it is sufficient for the assessee to establish that the debt has been written off in its books of accounts, as per Section 36(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

CIT v. Hughes Escorts Communications Ltd.
311 ITR 253 · 2009 · High Court
29
citing judgments

Expenses incurred prior to business commencement but after business setup are deductible as revenue expenses, as the setting up and commencement dates of a business are not necessarily the same.

CIT v. L.G. Electronic (India) Ltd.
282 ITR 545 · 2006 · High Court
23
citing judgments

The setting up of a business and the commencement of a business are distinct events and do not necessarily occur on the same date. Expenses incurred before the commencement of business but after the setting up of business may be considered for determining profits.

CIT v. Lakshmi Trust Co.
303 ITR 99 · 2008 · High Court
21
citing judgments

If the Tribunal finds that a transaction is genuine based on the facts, that finding is a finding of fact, and no substantial question of law arises, particularly regarding penalties under Section 271D or 271E.

Addl. CIT v. Smt. Prahati Baruah
111 Taxmann 86 · 2000 · High Court
12
citing judgments
CIT v. Maina Ore Transport Pvt. Ltd.
324 ITR 100 · 2010 · High Court
11
citing judgments

Advances given to employees that become unrecoverable are treated as a business loss deductible under Section 28 of the Income-tax Act. Ex-gratia payments to staff can also be deductible under Section 37(1).

N.V. Shanmugam & Co. v. CIT
57 ITR 321 · 1965 · Supreme Court
9
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 10(2)

Sahara India Tourism Development Corpn. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 8(2), Kolkata

ITA 357/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.357/Kol/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015) Sahara India Tourism Vs Acit, Circle-8(2), Kolkata Development Corporation Ltd, Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata Pan No. :Aaics 0060 P (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Kolkata, Dated 29.12.2017 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. None Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Sr. Dr That The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee & As Nobody Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee, The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Liable To Be Confirmed. It Was The Further Submission That In Para 4 Of The Assessment Order, The Ld. Assessing Officer Has Disallowed The Expenses & The Same Have Also Been Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A). In This Case, It Must Be Mentioned That This Appeal Is Of 2018 & Appeal Had Been Heard On Multiple Occasions & Had Been Released For Various Reasons. As Of Today & For The Last Past Few Postings/Hearings, None Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee. Therefore, Keeping This Fact Pending

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr. DR

Kunal Rajendra Mashru, Mumbai vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1, Junagadh

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 387/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.387/Rjt/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kunal Rajendra Mashru C/O. Pradip Corporation, D-3, Jeevan Jyot, Cawasji Patel Street, Mumbai – 400001, Maharashtra Pan : Afhpm1835K (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle-1, Junagadh : (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Choksy, Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2025 Order Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha: Captioned Appeal Filed By Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal), Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Chennai (In Short 'Cit(A)'), Dated 29.05.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 07.11.2019.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Choksy, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.DR
Section 10(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)