Section 10(26AAB) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 10(26AAB) is Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT (419 ITR 732), cited in 16 of the 29 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10(26AAB)

Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT
419 ITR 732 · 2019 · Supreme Court
16
citing judgments
Nand Kishore v. State of Punjab
6 SCC 614 · 1995 · Reported
11
citing judgments
Tarnish Investment and Trading Company Private Limited v. Union of India
179 Taxmann.com 198 · 2025 · High Court
6
citing judgments
Kusum Healthcare Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
173 Taxmann.com 58 · 2025 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Income Tax Officer v. Bangla Gupta
183 Taxmann.com 121 · 2026 · Supreme Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 10(26AAB)

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE,CHAMARAJANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHAMARAJANAGAR

In the result Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and stay petitions are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2808/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sounadararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy. N – JCIT & Shri Raghu, ITO
Section 10Section 147Section 148

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE,CHAMARAJNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHAMARAJNAGAR

In the result Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and stay petitions are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2807/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sounadararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy. N – JCIT & Shri Raghu, ITO
Section 10Section 147Section 148

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE,CHAMARAJNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHAMARAJNAGAR

In the result Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and stay petitions are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2806/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sounadararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy. N – JCIT & Shri Raghu, ITO
Section 10Section 147Section 148

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITEE,CHAMARAJANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHAMARAJNAGAR

In the result Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and stay petitions are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2805/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sounadararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy. N – JCIT & Shri Raghu, ITO
Section 10Section 147Section 148

KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI ,NARSINGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 149/JAB/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur06 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40Section 43B

KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI,NARSINGPUR vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 148/JAB/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur06 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40Section 43B

DAYALAL MEGHJI & CO. EMPLOYEES GROUP, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO-4(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 559/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.559/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dayalal Meghji & Co. Employees Group Gratuity Scheme 3Rd Floor, D.M Plaza, Chhotapara, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aaatd4892P

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(25)(iv)

JALPAIGURI ZILLA REGULATED MARKET COMMITTEE,JALPAIGURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2796/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 271BSection 44A

JALPAIGURI ZILLA REGULATED MARKET COMMITTEE,JALPAIGURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

Accordingly, ITA No. 2763/Kol/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2797/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 270ASection 271A

JALPAIGURI ZILLA REGULATED MARKET COMMITTEE,JALPAIGURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

Accordingly, ITA No. 2763/Kol/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2763/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 270ASection 271A

JALPAIGURI ZILLA REGULATED MARKET COMMITTEE,JALPAIGURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

Accordingly, ITA No. 2763/Kol/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2762/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 270ASection 271A

JALPAIGURI ZILLA REGULATED MARKET COMMITTEE,JALPAIGURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

Accordingly, ITA No. 2763/Kol/2025 is allowed for

ITA 2798/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 270ASection 271A

JALPAIGURI ZILLA REGULATED MARKET COMMITTEE,JALPAIGURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

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

ITA 2732/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2732/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jalpaiguri Zilla Regulated Market Committee..…………………..………………....…………………....Appellant Jalpaiguri Sadar, Jalpaiguri, W.B 735101.. [Pan: Aacaj0159Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Jalpaiguri...…….……....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pradeep Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Satyajit Mandal, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 02, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 03, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 19.09.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In The Case Of The Assessee Information Was Received By The Assessing Officer That The Assessee Had Deposited Substantial Cash In Its Savings Bank Account Maintained With Indian Overseas Bank During The Assessment Year 2016–17. It Is An Admitted Fact That The Assessee Did Not File Any Return Of Income Under Section 139(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, Proceedings Under Section 148A Of The Act Were Initiated. Show-Cause Notice Under Section 148A(B) Was Issued & Thereafter An Order Under Section

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 250

KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, RURA,RURA, KANPUR DEHAT vs. CPC, BANGALORE ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

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

ITA 101/LKW/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow13 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 249(2)(c)Section 250

APMC TARIKERE,TARIKERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHICKMAGALUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1442/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri C.R. Vasanth Kumar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N., D.R
Section 10Section 10(1)Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

GUJARAT STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1317/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr DR
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 139Section 147Section 250Section 69A

GUJARAT STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1316/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr DR
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 139Section 147Section 250Section 69A

DY. C.I.T., RANGE-6, LUCKNOW vs. U.P STATE FOOD & ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 190/LKW/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2013-14 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S U.P. Food & Essential Commodities Tax, Range-6, Lucknow Corp. Ltd., 17, Gokhley Marg, Lucknow- 01 Pan: Aaacu3257G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.11.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit (A)- 2, Lucknow Wherein The Ld. Cit(A), Lucknow Has Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act For The A.Y. 2013-14 On 30.03.2016. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-2, Lucknow Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Disallowance Made On Account Of Claim Of Exemption U/S 10(26Aab) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Without Appreciating The Facts That The Assessee Does Not Fulfill The Criteria To Claim Exemption U/S 10(26Aab) Of The I.T. Act, 1961. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add Or Amend Any One Or More Of The Grounds Of Appeals, As Stated Above, As & When Need To Do So Arises With The Prior Permission Of The Court.” 2. The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is A U.P. Government Enterprise, Claiming Exemption Under Section 10(26Aab) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Ao Was Not Convinced That The Assessee Corporation Was Entitled To Claim The Exemption Under Section 10(26Aab) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 & Therefore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(3)

URBAN WHOLESALE MARKET AUTHORITY,KOZHIKODE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1(3),KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 737/COCH/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2008-09 Urban Wholesale Market Authority .......... Appellant Vengeri, Kozhikode 673010 [Pan: Aaalu0257D] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wsd-1(3), Kozhikode .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Somy Cherian Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkatta [Cit(A)] Dated 12.08.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Market Committee Constituted As Per Go(Ms) No. 117/99Ad Dated 17.04.1999 By The Government Of Kerala. It Is Formed With The Object Of Facilitating Marketing Of Agricultural Produce. The Appellant Had Not Filed Return Of Income For Ay 2008-09 Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). The Case Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S. 148 On 28.03.2015. In 2 Urban Wholesale Market Authority Response To The Notice U/S. 148, The Appellant Filed Return Of Income On 22.04.2015 Disclosing Nil Income After Claiming Exemption U/S. 10(26Aab) Of The Act. However, The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Kozhikode (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Had Disallowed Exemption On The Ground That The Appellant Is Not A Legal Entity Under The Provisions Of Any Act Passed By The State Legislative Assembly. Further, Provisions Of Section 10(26Aab) Are Applicable Only From Ay 2009-10. 3. Being Aggrieved, An Appeal Was Filed Before The Cit(A), Who Vide The Impugned Order Confirmed The Action Of The Ao.

For Appellant: Shri Somy CherianFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 148

SANAND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1601/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : - Sanand Agricultural Produce Market Ito, Ward-2 Committee, Railway Station Road Exemption Main Road, Sanand, Ahmedabad. Vejalpur Pan : Aaals 0127 L. Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2