Section 10(37) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.11

Section 10(37) 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(37) is CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (332 ITR 167), cited in 897 of the 558 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10(37)

CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd.
332 ITR 167 · 2011 · High Court
897
citing judgments

The Commissioner cannot revise an assessment under Section 263 merely because the assessment order does not explicitly reflect an inquiry, or because the Commissioner holds a different opinion. An inquiry, even if considered inadequate, or an assessment based on a plausible view by the Assessing Officer after due examination, does not automatically make the order erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.

ITO v. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd.
343 ITR 329 · 2012 · High Court
438
citing judgments

For exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 263, the Commissioner must first find that the Assessing Officer's order is erroneous and unsustainable in law, as this is a condition precedent. An order is not erroneous merely because two views are possible, or if the Commissioner disagrees with the Assessing Officer's permissible view, or to simply remit the matter for further enquiries.

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)
315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
363
citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

Shyam Sunder v. Ram Kumar
8 SCC 24 · 2001 · Supreme Court
263
citing judgments

A statutory explanation that is clarificatory in nature applies retrospectively from the date the main provision came into force. However, if an explanation changes the law, it is not presumed to be retrospective, even if phrases like 'it is declared' or 'for the removal of doubts' are used.

Shyam Sunder v. Ram Kumar, (2001) 8 SCC 24 (para 44); Brij Mohan Das Laxman Das v. CIT
5 SCC 482 · 1997 · Supreme Court
261
citing judgments

For income to be assessable under the head 'Income from House Property' as per Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, beneficial ownership or the right to enjoy the property is sufficient; legal ownership is not a mandatory prerequisite.

Rama Bai v. CIT
181 ITR 400 · 1990 · Supreme Court
258
citing judgments

Interest income is taxable on either an accrual or cash basis, determined by accounting principles. This method was applicable prior to legislative changes that simplified the taxation of interest income.

KOTAK MAHINDRA CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER. 367 50.(1987) 3 SCC 544: MADHAV AYAWADANRAO HOSKOT v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA. 51
10 SCC 1 · 2014 · Supreme Court
250
citing judgments

The judgment in Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd. does not appear to be directly cited for a specific income tax proposition in the provided passages. The passages merely list it as one of several cases cited in subsequent judgments, without detailing its specific contribution to the legal reasoning.

Narayan Tatu Rane v. ITO
70 Taxmann.com 227 · 2016 · ITAT
220
citing judgments

Before revising an assessment order under Section 263, the CIT/PCIT must conduct their own inquiries or verifications to establish that the Assessing Officer's order is erroneous and unsustainable in law, rather than merely directing further inquiry or pointing out the AO's lack of inquiry.

Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT
1 SCC 139 · 1980 · Supreme Court
214
citing judgments

The cardinal principle of tax law dictates that the law applicable to an assessment is the law in force for the relevant assessment year, unless the statute expressly or implicitly provides otherwise. A clarificatory statutory explanation must be read into the main provision from its inception.

CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya
91 Taxmann.com 20 · 2018 · Supreme Court
205
citing judgments

Interest on enhanced compensation received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the compensation, not merely interest income, and is exigible to tax on a receipt basis.

Judgments on Section 10(37)

Akhilesh Bansal, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

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

ITA 2394/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhakhilesh Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 1 (1), 47, Raj Niwas, Sector 5, Gurgaon. Gurgaon - 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Ahfpb1275J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi, Ca Shri Satyajeet Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri G.P. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.07.2026 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 02.01.2026 For The Ay 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, In The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Received Enhanced Compensation Amounting To Rs.2,15,77,773/- Together With Interest Of Rs.2,23,78,473/- Consequent To Compulsory Acquisition Of Land Situated In Village Badha, Tehsil Manesar, District Gurugram By 2 Huda. The Land Was Originally Purchased In The Year 2007. The Assessee Claimed The Enhanced Compensation & Damages In The Form Of Interest U/S 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act As Exempt On The Ground That The Land Acquired Was Rural Agricultural Land Situated Beyond The Prescribed Municipal Limits And, Therefore, Did Not Constitute A "Capital Asset" Within The Meaning Of Section 2(14)(Iii) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). The Assessing Officer, However, Rejected The Claim & Treated The Enhanced Compensation As Taxable Under Section 45(5) & The Interest As Taxable Under The Head "Income From Other Sources".

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.P. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 28Section 45(5)