Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.141

Section 80IB(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 80IB(10) is K.C. Builders & Anr. v. ACIT (265 ITR 562), cited in 241 of the 838 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80IB(10)

K.C. Builders & Anr. v. ACIT
265 ITR 562 · 2004 · Supreme Court
241
citing judgments

When the addition made in the assessment order, on the basis of which a penalty for concealment under section 271(1)(c) is levied, is subsequently deleted, the penalty has no basis and must be cancelled.

CIT v. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd.
354 ITR 180 · 2013 · High Court
208
citing judgments

Annual Letting Value (ALV) of unsold stock-in-trade flats/shops held by a real estate developer can be assessed under Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as income from house property. This approach was followed by the Assessing Officer (AO) based on this decision.

CIT v. Brahma Associates
333 ITR 289 · 2011 · High Court
97
citing judgments

A developer is entitled to proportionate deduction under Section 80IB(10) for housing projects even if certain conditions, such as unit built-up area limits, are not fully met across all units. Additionally, the conditions introduced by Section 80IB(10)(d) apply prospectively to projects commenced and sanctioned before April 1, 2005.

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.

CIT v. Sarkar Builders
375 ITR 392 · 2015 · Supreme Court
79
citing judgments

An assessee should not be prejudiced by differences in accounting treatment if accounting principles are duly followed and the issue is revenue neutral, as hypothetical income cannot be subjected to tax.

Viswas Promoters Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT
255 CTR 149 · 2013 · High Court
36
citing judgments

The mere fact that one block in a housing project has units exceeding the built-up area limit does not disqualify the entire project from claiming deduction under section 80IB(10). Assessees are entitled to proportionate deduction for eligible blocks or units.

(i) Viswas Promoters Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant CIT, Circle I, Madras
29 Taxmann.com 19 · 2013 · High Court
28
citing judgments

Deduction under section 80-IB(10) is available on a proportionate basis for eligible units, even if some units in a project exceed the prescribed area limits. The entire claim should not be rejected due to partial non-compliance.

Ramco Cements Ltd. v. DCIT
373 ITR 146 · 2015 · High Court
28
citing judgments

An assessee can make a claim of deduction for the first time before the appellate authorities.

PCIT, Panaji v. Goa Tourism Development Ltd.
102 Taxmann.com 437 · 2019 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for repairs and renovation of hotel premises, which improves existing business without creating a new asset or advantage of an enduring nature, is treated as revenue expenditure.

Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture v. ACIT
159 TTJ 390 · 2014 · ITAT
17
citing judgments

An undertaking developing and building housing projects is eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10) if the housing project receives approval, and a separate approval for each distinct housing project within a larger development is not necessarily required.

Judgments on Section 80IB(10)

The ITO, Ward-2 (1) (4), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S Jagjit Builders and Developers, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 137/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.137/Rjt/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2012-13) I.T.O, बनाम/ M/S Jagjit Builders & Ward-2(1), Developers, Vs. Rajkot. Ankur Apts., Dr. Floor, Aadarsh Society, B/H Ioc Bhavan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfj9480A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M.N. Maurya, Cit. D.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M.J. Ranpura, A.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 27/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Rajkot [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Dated 25/02/2016, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 27/02/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2012-13. A.Y. 2012-13 The 1St Issue Raised By The Revenue Is That The Learned Cit (A) Erred In 2. Deleting The Addition Made By The Ao For Rs. 10,20,62,695/- On Account Of Unexplained Expenditure Under Section 69C Of The Act

For Appellant: Shri M.N. Maurya, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri M.J. Ranpura, A.R
Section 133ASection 69C

M/S. K.G. Developers, Surat vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-2(3), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2396/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2396/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. K.G. Developers, V. Dy. Commissioner Of Final Plot No.104, Althan Canal Road, Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Nr. Gujarat Vitran Mathak, Althan, Surat. Surat-395 017. [Pan: Aaifk 9749 C] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रतीकीओरसे /Assessee By None राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Ms. Anupama Singla, Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 11-02-2020 उद्घोषणाकीतारीख/Pronouncement On: 13-02-2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per O.P.Meena, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of 1. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-I, Surat [In Short “The Cit(A)”] Dated 20-07-2016, For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Ground No.1 & 2 Relates To Rejecting The Claim For Deduction U/S.80Ib Of The Act To The Tune Of Rs.9522022/- In Respect An Eligible Housing Project. 3. Brief Facts Of The Cases Are That The Assessee Was Engaged In The Business Of Builder & Developer In The Name & Style Of M/S. K.G. Developers. It Has Constructed A High Rise Residential Building, Namely “Sai Kg Flats” At Fp No.104, Block No.206, Althan Canal Road, Althan, Taluka Choryasi, Surat. The Return Of Income Was Filed On 27-09-2013 Showing Total

Section 80I

DCIT- Circle - 3, Mumbai vs. Omkar Builders and Developers, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 248/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.248/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit Circle-3, Thane बिधम/ M/S. Omkar Builders & Room No.02, 6Th Floor, Developers Vs. Aashar It Park, B-Wing, A-1/54, Shah & Nahar Wagle Industrial Estate, Industrial Estate Sitaram Road No.16Z, Thane (W- Jadhav Marg, Lower Parel 400604. (W), Mumbai-400013. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabfo3908J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Jitendra Singh (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 08.10.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -02, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2014- 15. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Singh (AR)For Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 801Section 801BSection 80I