Section 10AA of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.144

Section 10AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 144 (Special provisions in respect of newly established Units in Special Economic Zones) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 144 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 10AA is Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (372 ITR 694), cited in 803 of the 857 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10AA

Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
372 ITR 694 · 2015 · High Court
803
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the actual amount of exempt income earned by the assessee. This principle also applies when computing book profits under section 115JB.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
391 ITR 274 · 2017 · Supreme Court
290
citing judgments

Deduction under Section 10A or 10AA of the Income-tax Act is computed on the profits of the eligible unit without first setting off losses from other units or non-eligible units. Conversely, losses incurred by an eligible unit are allowed to be set off against the assessee's other taxable business profits.

Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai
84 Taxmann.com 51 · 2017 · ITAT
263
citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot be deleted merely due to technical defects in the penalty notice, such as not ticking the specific default, if the assessee understood the charges.

CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd.
370 ITR 338 · 2015 · High Court
252
citing judgments

The disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, read with Rule 8D, cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned by the assessee in the relevant previous year. If no exempt income is earned, no disallowance under Section 14A can be made.

Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh v. CIT
239 ITR 587 · 1999 · Supreme Court
243
citing judgments

The Supreme Court lays down principles for deducting tax at source (TDS) under Section 195 on payments to non-residents, including aspects of income deemed taxable in India and the application of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) under Section 90.

CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.
330 ITR 175 · 2011 · High Court
207
citing judgments

Disallowances made under various sections, such as for PF/ESIC contributions, result in an increase in business profits, and these enhanced profits are eligible for deduction under Sections 10A and 10AA. Similarly, gains from foreign exchange fluctuations directly linked to export sales are also eligible for deduction under Section 10A.

CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal
9 SCC 589 · 2009 · Supreme Court
200
citing judgments

The Supreme Court clarifies the scope of penalty under Section 271(1)(c), holding that for its applicability, conditions stated in the provision must strictly exist, and making an incorrect claim in law does not automatically amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.

ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd.
92 Taxmann.com 361 · 2018 · Supreme Court
194
citing judgments

Reassessment under Section 147/148 is invalid if it constitutes a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer without any fresh tangible material, especially after the assessee made a full and truthful disclosure during the original scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3).

CIT v. HCL Technologies Ltd.
404 ITR 719 · 2018 · Supreme Court
174
citing judgments

When calculating deductions under sections like 10A or 10AA, any expenses or items reduced from 'export turnover' in the numerator must also be reduced from 'total turnover' in the denominator to ensure consistent application of the deduction formula.

616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd.
217 Taxmann 207 · 2013 · High Court
170
citing judgments

Prior to the insertion of Explanation 2 to Section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, there was an ambiguity regarding the due date for payment of employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI. The ambiguity was whether the due date was as per the respective Acts or the due date for filing the assessee's return of income.

Judgments on Section 10AA

Equiniti India Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Crop .Circle 2(1), Chennai

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

ITA 501/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.501/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 Equiniti India Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dlf It Park, Block 10, 8Th Floor, Income Tax, 1/124 Shivaji Gardens, Manapakkam, Corporate Circle 2(1), Mount Poonamallee Road, Chennai. Ramapuram, Chennai 600 089. [Pan:Aabci 3514M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Siddhesh Chaugule, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.08.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 21.02.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: Grounds Of Appeal 1. General Equiniti India Private Limited ('Equiniti India' Or 'The Appellant') Submits That The Order Dated 21 February 2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeals (Cit(A)'), National Faceless

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

Equiniti India Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Crop .Circle 2(1), Chennai

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

ITA 500/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.500/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Equiniti India Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dlf It Park, Block 10, 8Th Floor, Income Tax, 1/124 Shivaji Gardens, Manapakkam, Corporate Circle 2(1), Mount Poonamallee Road, Chennai. Ramapuram, Chennai 600 089. [Pan:Aabci 3514M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Siddhesh Chaugule, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.08.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 21.02.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: Grounds Of Appeal 1. General Equiniti India Private Limited ('Equiniti India' Or 'The Appellant') Submits That The Order Dated 21 February 2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeals (Cit(A)'), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

Uni Design Jewellery Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1345/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhuni Design Elite Jewellery Vs. Dcit, Cc-1(2) Private Limited 906, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha 401 & 402, 4Th Floor Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. Tower- Ii, Seepz ++ M.K. Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 096 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaack3499E Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Vijay Mehta Respondent By : Lieder Panicker Date Of Hearing 26.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-47, Mumbai, Dated 17.03.2023 For A.Y. 2017- 18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Hon'Ble Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Made By The Ld. Ao By Not Considering Export Sale Realized After Limitation Of Time As Export Turnover & Consequently Restricting Deduction U/S 10Aa Of The Act By Rs.6,87,170 By Computing Deduction U/S 10Aa At Rs.5,66,02,032. The Appellant Prays That Export Sale Realized After Limitation Of Time Be Considered As Export Turnover & Deduction U/S 10Aa As Claimed By The Appellant Be Granted. The Appellant Craves, Leave To Add, Amend, Alter, Omit Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal Before Or During The Hearing Of The Appeal, If So Advised.”

For Appellant: Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Lieder Panicker
Section 10ASection 143(2)

Sasken Technologies Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITTPA 150/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am It(Tp)A No.150/Bang/2023 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 M/S.Sasken Technologies Limited The Assistant Commissioner #139/25, Amarjyothi Layout Of Income-Tax, Circle 6(1)(1) V. Ring Road, Domlur Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 071. Pan : Aaecs6424R.. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Padam Chand Kincha, Ca Respondent By : Sri.Sunil Kumar Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2023 Date Of Hearing : 03.05.2023 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 25.01.2023 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2010- 2011. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Providing Telecommunication, Software Services & Solutions To Various Entities. For The Assessment Year 2010-2011, The Return Of Income Was Filed On 11.10.2010 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.42,59,22,566 & Book Profit Of Rs.66,46,62,271. The Assessment Was Selected For Scrutiny & Mandatory Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were 2 It(Tp)A No.150/Bang/2023. M/S.Sasken Technologies Limited.

For Appellant: Sri.Padam Chand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 260A