Section 35DDA of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 35DDA is ICDS Ltd. v. CIT (350 ITR 527), cited in 280 of the 25 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 35DDA

ICDS Ltd. v. CIT
350 ITR 527 · 2013 · Supreme Court
280
citing judgments

An assessee engaged in the business of hire purchase or leasing, being the lessor, is entitled to claim depreciation on assets leased out, even if the assets are registered in the name of the lessee and used by the lessee.

Raj Dadarkar & Associates v. ACIT
394 ITR 592 · 2017 · Supreme Court
107
citing judgments

The object clause in a partnership deed is not determinative of the head under which rental income is to be assessed; income from letting out shops and stalls developed by the assessee may still be classified as 'Income from House Property' rather than 'Profits and Gains of Business'.

Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. v. CIT
251 ITR 329 · 2001 · Supreme Court
53
citing judgments

Income earned during the construction phase of a project, which has a direct and inextricable nexus with the project's setting up, constitutes a capital receipt and reduces the project's cost, rather than being taxable as revenue income. This applies to incidental income like interest on funds (e.g., share capital, grants) temporarily parked before being utilized for the specific project.

CIT v. Dr. B. Venkata Rao
243 ITR 81 · 2000 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

A building used as a nursing home qualifies as 'plant' under the Income-tax Act if it functions as a tool of the trade with which the business is carried on, as determined by the functional test.

CIT v. Gemini Arts (P) Ltd.
254 ITR 201 · 2002 · High Court
33
citing judgments

Lump sum payments for lease, even for an extended period, can be considered revenue expenditure if they substitute for revenue expenditure. Payments that substitute for revenue expenditure are generally treated as revenue expenditure.

National Travel Services v. CIT
401 ITR 154 · 2018 · Supreme Court
32
citing judgments

The Supreme Court refers the issue of whether a shareholder must be both registered and beneficial for reconsideration by a larger bench.

CIT v. Bank of Tokyo Ltd.
71 Taxmann 85 · 1993 · High Court
30
citing judgments

The refund of guarantee commission for the unexpired period of a guarantee contract, where the contract is revoked prematurely, is a valid deduction for the assessee-bank.

Novo Nordisk India P. Ltd. v. DCIT
42 Taxmann.com 168 · 2014 · ITAT
24
citing judgments

ESOP cross-charge expenses are allowable as a deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act. The difference between the fair market value of shares and the price at which they are issued to employees of an Indian associated enterprise constitutes an ascertained liability that is revenue in character.

Meeraj Estate & Developers v. CIT
113 Taxmann.com 231 · 2020 · High Court
19
citing judgments
Union Bank of India v. DCIT LTU(2)
166 Taxmann.com 207 · 2024 · Reported
17
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 35DDA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(2)(1), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, CHURCHGATE vs. MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 7035/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand V Mahadeokar

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 28Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35D

MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6692/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand V Mahadeokara.Y:2014-15 Mumbai International Vs. Dcit, Circle – 2(2)(1) Airport Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road 1St Floor, Terminal-1B, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – Chhatrpati Shivaji 400020. International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400099. Pan/Gir No. Aaecm6285C (Applicant) (Respondent) A.Y:2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 2(2)(1) Vs. Mumbai International Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Airport Ltd., New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 1St Floor, Terminal-1B, 400020. Chhatrpati Shivaji International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400099. Pan/Gir No. Aaecm6285C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Saurabha Soparkar Virtually Appeared Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.03.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand V Mahadeokar, Am: These Cross Appeals Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Under Section 250 Of The Mumbai International Airport Ltd., Mumbai Income-Tax Act, 1961 Dated 05.08.2025 In The Case Of The Assessee For Assessment Year 2014–15. The Assessment In The Present Case Was Originally Completed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 30.12.2017. Since The Issues Involved In The Appeals Of The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Arise Out Of The Same Appellate Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 28Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35D

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(3)(1),, MUMBAI vs. ZOETIS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 5984/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: BEFORESHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Revenue by
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 35D

COLGATE PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3293/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 37(1)Section 80G

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 740/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 738/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 736/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

ACIT,ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 735/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 728/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 726/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 724/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 723/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 722/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

DCIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4700/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

DCIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4699/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

NOVARTIS INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4574/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

NOVARTIS INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4573/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

NOVARTIS INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 7733/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. THE RELIANCE MOTOR COMPANY LTD., CHENNAI

Appeal of the revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 404/CHNY/2024[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Dec 2024AY 1999-00

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.404/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) The Income Tax Officer, Vs. The Reliance Motor Company Ltd, Corporate Ward 3(1) 761, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [Pan: Aaact 1230A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. M. Karthikeyan, Irs, Addl Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate & Shri. S. Nagarajan, C.A. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. M. Karthikeyan, IRS, Addl CITFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate &
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

COLGATE-PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6, MUMBAI

ITA 2645/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No. 2645/Mum/2024

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry & Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RsFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT, D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80GSection 80J

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2