Section 10(35) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.11

Section 10(35) 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(35) is CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (326 ITR 1), cited in 543 of the 196 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10(35)

CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.
326 ITR 1 · 2010 · Supreme Court
543
citing judgments

For attracting Section 14A disallowance, there must be a proximate cause relating the expenditure to actual tax-exempt income, and such disallowance is not automatic but requires positive material. Additionally, Section 94(7) on dividend stripping only ignores losses to the extent of dividend received for assessment years post-April 1, 2002, allowing the remaining loss.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
341 ITR 385 · 2012 · High Court
270
citing judgments

A provision for doubtful debts cannot be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes.

Gramaphone Co. of India Ltd. v. Birendra Bahadur Pandey
132 Taxmann 373 · 2003 · Supreme Court
146
citing judgments
DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse
259 ITR 280 · 2003 · Supreme Court
86
citing judgments

Violation of investment mandates under Section 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a charitable trust results in the complete denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Act.

Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. v. DCIT
34 Taxmann.com 19 · 2013 · ITAT
64
citing judgments

A transfer pricing adjustment for corporate guarantees provided by an Indian entity to its Associated Enterprises (AEs) where no fees are charged can be estimated at approximately 0.20%. The arm's length principle applies to such intra-group corporate guarantee transactions.

CIT v. V.S. Dempo and Co. P CIT Vs. V.S. Dempo and Co. P Ltd.
206 ITR 291 · 1994 · High Court
54
citing judgments

Losses arising from the conversion of foreign currency or from foreign exchange forward contracts entered into for business transactions, such as hedging export proceeds, are considered revenue or trading losses and are deductible as business expenditure under Section 37(1). The amortization of premium paid on such foreign exchange contracts is also an allowable deduction.

Canara Bank v. JCIT
60 ITR (Trib) 1 · 2017 · ITAT
47
citing judgments

For banks, the computation of bad debt allowance under sections 36(1)(vii) or 36(1)(viia) must be restricted to only incremental advances, rejecting broader interpretations by tax authorities.

CIT v. T. Veerabhadra Rao
155 ITR 152 · 1985 · Supreme Court
44
citing judgments

When a partnership firm takes over the business of an earlier firm, all assets and liabilities transfer to the new firm. The deduction for bad debts is available to the assessee on the total amount written off, even if part of the debt (interest) was offered to tax in earlier years.

PCIT v. Tata Capital Ltd.
161 Taxmann.com 557 · 2024 · High Court
41
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must record their dissatisfaction with the correctness of an assessee's claim regarding expenditure in relation to exempt income, providing cogent reasons, before invoking Section 14A and Rule 8D for disallowance.

DCIT v. Gloster Jute Mills Limited
88 Taxmann.com 738 · 2017 · ITAT
39
citing judgments

Additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) can be claimed in the year an asset is acquired and installed, even if it is claimed in a subsequent year of acquisition and installation.

Judgments on Section 10(35)

Pramode Kumar Himatsingka, L/H of Gita Devi Himatsingka (Since Deceased), Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 30(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 737/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.737/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Gita Devi Himatsingka (Since Deceased) Represented By L/H Pramode Kumar Himatsingka…………….………..……..…………………....Appellant 2C, Queens Park, Ballygunge, Kol-19. [Pan: Aarph3735N] Vs. Ito, Ward-30(1), Kolkata…………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ranu Biswas, Acit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By Shri Pramod Kumar Himatsingka, Legal Heir Of Smt. Geeta Devi Himatsingka (Deceased), Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Dated 19.02.2025, Confirming The Rectification Order Passed Under Section 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Dated 30.10.2019, By The Cpc, Bangalore, For The Assessment Year 2018–19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Who Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.30,51,986/-. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act On 07.12.2018 & A Refund Of Rs.40,800/- Was Determined & Granted To The Assessee. Subsequently, The Cpc Passed A Rectification Order Dated 30.10.19 By

Section 10(35)Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 154

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai

ITA 1262/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Cognizant Technology Solutions Vs The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai - 600 096. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Pan: Aaacd 3312M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai - 600 096. Pan: Aaacd 3312M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निधारिती की ओर से/Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2025 - 2 -

For Respondent: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)