Section 10(26AAB) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.11

Section 10(26AAB) 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(26AAB) is Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT (419 ITR 732), cited in 20 of the 68 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
20
citing judgments

Courts should generally condone delay in filing appeals when there is a reasonable cause, and a liberal approach should be taken to ensure justice is not denied on technical grounds.

Nand Kishore v. State of Punjab
6 SCC 614 · 1995 · Reported
11
citing judgments

Courts should show utmost consideration to a litigant seeking condonation of delay, even for a significant period, if the explanation for the delay does not suggest mala fides or a dilatory strategy.

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)

M.P. Warehousing and Logistics Corporation, Indore vs. ACIT (TDS), Indore

In the result, both appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 196/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10Section 119Section 139Section 194Section 201(1)Section 250

M.P. Warehousing and Logistics Corporation, Indore vs. ACIT (TDS), Indore

In the result, both appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 195/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10Section 119Section 139Section 194Section 201(1)Section 250

Pc Commissioner of Income Tax - 20 vs. M/S Fish Poultry and Egg Marketing Committee

ITA - 72 / 2023HC Delhi08 Feb 2023
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 2

Dy. C.I.T., Range-6, Lucknow vs. U.P State Food & Essential Commodities Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10

ITA 194/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year:2011-12

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 253

Dy. C.I.T., Range-6, Lucknow vs. U.P State Food & Essential Commodities Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10

ITA 193/LKW/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year:2011-12

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 253

Dy. C.I.T., Range-6, Lucknow vs. U.P State Food & Essential Commodities Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10

ITA 175/LKW/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year:2011-12

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 253

U.P State Food & Essential Commodities Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-VI(2), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10

ITA 520/LKW/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year:2011-12

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 253

The Market Committee, Sampla vs. ACIT, Rohtak Circle, Rohtak

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5546/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. Brr Kumarr

Section 10Section 12ASection 271BSection 273BSection 44A

The Market Committee, Rohtak vs. ACIT, Rohtak Circle, Rohtak

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5545/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. Brr Kumarr

Section 10Section 12ASection 271BSection 273BSection 44A

M/S. Perfect Krushi Market Yard Pvt.Ltd, Nashik vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax -2, Nashik

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

ITA 464/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.464/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Perfect Krushi Market Vs. Pr. Cit-2, Yard Pvt. Ltd., Nashik. Nilgiri Park, Near Yash Lawns, Nashik- 422003. Pan : Aagcp4760P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanket Joshi Shri Naimish Sanjay Dixit Revenue By : Shri Kalika Singh Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.01.2022 : आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax- 2, Nashik [‘Pr.Cit’ For Short] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dated 17.01.2019 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Pcit Erred In Passing The Revision Order U/S 263 By Holding That The Asst. Order Passed U/S 143(3) In The Case Of The Assessee Company For A.Y.2015 - 16 Was Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & Thereby Directing The A.O. To Verify The Issue Regarding Exemption U/S 10(26Aab) De Novo. 2. The Learned Pcit Erred In Holding That The A.O. Has Not Applied The Proper Provisions Of Law While Verifying The Issue Of Allowing

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Kalika Singh
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 263

Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Allahabad vs. DCIT-CPC, Bangalore, Local-ITO-1(2), Allahabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay application is dismissed

ITA 109/ALLD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad16 Dec 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18 Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, V. Dcit-Cpc, Bangalore (Local Sirsa Ito-1(2), Allahabad Pan-Aaajk0832A (Appellant) (Respondent) Stay Application No.16/Alld/2020 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, V. Dcit-Cpc, Bangalore (Local Sirsa Ito-1(2), Allahabad Pan-Aaajk0832A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Sweta Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

M/S. M. P. Ware Housing & Logistics Corporation, Indore vs. CIT (TDS), Indore

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 491/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2011-12 M.P. Warehousing & Acit (Tds) Logistics Corporation, Vs. Indore Lrt Parisar, Aerodrum Road, Bada Ganapati, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Aadcm7742B Appellant By Shri Rajesh Mehta, Ca Revenue By Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.03.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 26.05.2020

Section 133ASection 194Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)

ITO, Ward- 60(4), New Delhi vs. Fish Poultry and Egg Marketing Committee, Delhi

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4602/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2020AY 2013-14
Section 10Section 119

M/S Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Etawah vs. DCIT-CPC, Agra

In the result, for statistical purposes the appeal of the assessee is treated as

ITA 92/AGR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra31 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & S.A. No. 04/Agra/2019) (Assessment Year-2015-16)

Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(1)Section 282

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Fish Poultry and Egg Marketing Committee, Delhi

ITA 4189/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 10

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Fish Poultry and Egg Marketing Committee, Delhi

ITA 4188/DEL/2016[20110-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 10

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Fish Poultry and Egg Marketing Committee, Delhi

ITA 4187/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 10

Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Ahmednagar vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Ahmednagar

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2772/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.2771 & 2772/Pun/2017 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S Agricultural Produce Market Committee, 1St Floor, Kisan Kranti Building, Market Yard, Station Road, Ahmednagar. अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aaala0304R …. Vs. Acit, Ahmednagar Circle, Ahmednagar. …. ""यथ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawli
Section 10Section 24

M/S. Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Ahmednagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ahmednagar Circle, Ahmednagar

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2771/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.2771 & 2772/Pun/2017 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S Agricultural Produce Market Committee, 1St Floor, Kisan Kranti Building, Market Yard, Station Road, Ahmednagar. अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aaala0304R …. Vs. Acit, Ahmednagar Circle, Ahmednagar. …. ""यथ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawli
Section 10Section 24

Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Agra vs. ACIT CPC, Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 254/AGR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jul 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154