Section 80-IB(10) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.141

Section 80-IB(10) falls under section 80IB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 141 (Deduction in respect of profits and gains from certain industrial undertakings) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 141 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 80-IB(10) is CIT v. Vandana Properties (353 ITR 36), cited in 88 of the 100 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80-IB(10)

CIT v. Vandana Properties
353 ITR 36 · 2013 · High Court
88
citing judgments

The Bombay High Court holds that for deduction under Section 80IB(10), the minimum plot area of one acre refers to the aggregate area of the land on which housing projects are developed, not necessarily to each individual project if multiple projects are undertaken on a larger single plot. This means the deduction is allowable even if a sub-block within the overall project is less than one acre, provided the total plot size meets the minimum.

PCIT v. Majestic Developers
426 ITR 175 · 2020 · High Court
9
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 80-IB(10)

Agni Estates and Foundation Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1057/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Asish Tripathy, JCIT
Section 154Section 80

Agni Estates and Foundation Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1056/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Asish Tripathy, JCIT
Section 154Section 80

DCIT, Chennai vs. Acestar Properties Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 860/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. B. Ramakrishnan, CA
Section 80

DCIT, Chennai vs. Acestar Properties Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 859/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. B. Ramakrishnan, CA
Section 80

DCIT, Chennai vs. Acestar Properties Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 858/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. B. Ramakrishnan, CA
Section 80

ITO 29(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Avani Developers, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue has to fail in its appeal

ITA 7368/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: (A.Y : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar YadavFor Respondent: Shri K. Gopal, Shri Jitendra Singh
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

Sri.Syed Aleemullah, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 389/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri Syed Aleemullah, Prop. S.A.Developers, No.950, 27Th A Main, Jayanagar, 9Th Block, Bengaluru-560069. … Appellant Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle- 4(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant By : Shri P.Dinesh, Advocate. Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit(Dr). Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 04/04/2017

For Appellant: Shri P.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

ITO 31(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Neeta Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4171/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 80Section 80I

M/S. Trident Properties, Chennai vs. ITO, Coimbatore

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

ITA 3138/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3138/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Trident Properties, C/O Shri S. Sridhar, The Income Tax Officer, Shri A.S. Sriraman, Advocates, V. Non-Corporate Ward 1(1), New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Coimbatore. 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aaeft 8389 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCIT
Section 80

Asst CIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai vs. Oberoi Reality Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal is dismissed in limine with no order as to cost

ITA 6925/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri R. Murlidhar (AR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 80

ITO, Chennai vs. Chettinad Housing Constructions, Chennai

In the result, both, the appeal of the Revenue and the cross-

ITA 1670/CHNY/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1670/Mds/2013 & C.O. No.159/Mds/2013 (In I.T.A. No.1670/Mds/2013) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer, M/S Chettinad Housing Constructions, 1St Floor, No.8/2, Kennedy 2Nd Street, Business Ward Iii(2), V. Chennai - 600 034. Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. Pan : Aaffc 2827 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent & Cross-Objector)

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCITFor Respondent: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 80

ITO WD 2(4), Thane vs. Shiv Om Universal, Badlapur

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6754/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Vachaspati TripathiFor Respondent: Shri Shriram Bajaj
Section 143(3)Section 80

ACIT Cen Cir 2, Thane vs. Salasar Developers, Thane

In the result, the questions raised in the appeal are answered thus:—

ITA 2939/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2271/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Salasar Developers, Asst. Cit-11, बनाम/ Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Salasar Thane Brijbhoomi, Temba Hospital Road, Vs. Bhayander (W), Thane-401 101 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfs 6465 R (Assessee) (Revenue) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2939/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बनाम/ Asst. Cit-11, Salasar Developers, Thane Thane-401 101 Vs. (Revenue) (Assessee) : : Shri Virag H. Shah Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Mohammed Rizwan सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 12.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Thane (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 26.12.2012, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 09.12.2011. 2

For Respondent: Shri Mohammed Rizwan
Section 143(3)Section 80

Salasar Developers, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2, Thane

In the result, the questions raised in the appeal are answered thus:—

ITA 2271/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2271/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Salasar Developers, Asst. Cit-11, बनाम/ Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Salasar Thane Brijbhoomi, Temba Hospital Road, Vs. Bhayander (W), Thane-401 101 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfs 6465 R (Assessee) (Revenue) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2939/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बनाम/ Asst. Cit-11, Salasar Developers, Thane Thane-401 101 Vs. (Revenue) (Assessee) : : Shri Virag H. Shah Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Mohammed Rizwan सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 12.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Thane (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 26.12.2012, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 09.12.2011. 2

For Respondent: Shri Mohammed Rizwan
Section 143(3)Section 80

ITO WD 3(4), Kalyan vs. Paresh Construction Co, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5988/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalvs. Paresh The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Construction Co., Kalyan Range-3, 2Nd Floor, Rani Shop No.6, Ground Floor, Mansion, Murbad Road, Kalyan (W), Dass Krupa Building, R. P. 421 301 Road, Kalyan (W) 421301 Pan:Aabfp 5209 K .. Appellant Respondent Appellant By .. Ms. Bharti Singh, Dr Respondent By .. Ms. Nikita Agarwal,Ar Date Of Hearing .. 27-07-2016 Date Of Pronouncement .. 27-07-2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 80Section 80I

ITO 9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shabbir K. Kanchwala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5626/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Love Kumar, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Punaniya
Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 80I

ITO 25(2)(2)), Mumbai vs. Prathmesh Realtors, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed on the afore-said terms

ITA 3382/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3382/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer-25(2)(2), Prathmesh Realtors बनाम/ C-11, Bldg., Room No. 106, A-101, Sweta Park, Daulat Nagar Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Kurla Complex, Road No. 2, Borivali (E), Vs. Bandra(E), Mumbai-51 Mumbai-400 066 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaifp 8580 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Pandian ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Tarun Ghia सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.03.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 10.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-35, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 14.2.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11 Vide Order Dated 12.3.2013. 2. The First Issue Under Appeal (Raised Vide Grounds 1 & 2) Is The Validity Or Otherwise In Law Of The Proportionate Deduction To The Assessee’S, A Builder & Developer, Housing Project By The Name ‘Prathmesh Heritage’, At Mira Road (E)

For Appellant: Shri S. PandianFor Respondent: Shri Tarun Ghia
Section 143(3)Section 80

ACIT, Chennai vs. Elegant Estates, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and both the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 225/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.224 & 225/Mds/2016 & C.O. Nos.51 & 52/Mds/2016 (In I.T.A. Nos.224 & 225/Mds/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Elegant Estates, No.1B/3, 1St Main Road, Income Tax, V. Non-Corporate Circle – 15, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aacfe 1274 G (Appellant) (Respondent & Cross Objector)

For Appellant: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CITFor Respondent: Sh. R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 80

ACIT, Chennai vs. Elegant Estates, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and both the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 224/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.224 & 225/Mds/2016 & C.O. Nos.51 & 52/Mds/2016 (In I.T.A. Nos.224 & 225/Mds/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Elegant Estates, No.1B/3, 1St Main Road, Income Tax, V. Non-Corporate Circle – 15, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aacfe 1274 G (Appellant) (Respondent & Cross Objector)

For Appellant: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CITFor Respondent: Sh. R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 80

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Prestige Estate Projects Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and

ITA 850/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Sibichan K Mathew, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 24