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)

Patel Goyal Associates, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 132/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.132/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Patel Goyal Associates, 501, Fortune House, Prabhat Road, Erandwane, Pune-411004. अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Aahfp0519N …. Vs. Ito, Judicial (Hq), …. ""यथ" / Respondent Pune. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Nikhil Pathak & Shri Kailash Agarwal ""थ" की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Sanjeev Ghai सुनवाई क" तारीख / घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.03.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-3, Pune Dated 24.11.2015 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs.29,65,196/- U/S 57(Iii) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Interest U/S 57(Iii). 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Interest Paid Ought To Have Been Allowed U/S 57(Iii). For That Learned Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That When The Learned A.O. Has Recorded A Clear Cut Finding In The Assessment Order & Affirmed The Position Taken By The Appellant In Return Of Income That When Interest Is Not Claimed & Also Not Allowable U/S 36(1)(Iii), It Has To Be Allowed U/S 57(Iii). 3. For That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate The Fact That When Borrowed Funds Were Not Required For Business Purposes Due To Availability Of Surplus Funds In Regular Business, Interest Is Paid Only To Earn Interest Income & Hence Interest Cannot Be Disallowed U/S 57(Iii).

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghai
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57Section 80I

Modi Shelters Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 329/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Modi Shelters Pvt Vs. Income Tax Officer Ltd., Ashoka Hitech Ward – 16(4), Chambers, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Aadcm8355N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Rama Rao Revenue By : Smt. Komali Krishna Date Of Hearing : 07-03-2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13-03-2019 Order Per D.S. Sunder Singh, A.M: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-4, Hyderabad In Appeal No.0102/2016- 17/Ito,W-16(4)/Cit(A)-4/Hyd/17-18 Dated 21.11.2017. 2. The Assessee Filed The Grounds Of Appeal Along With The Form – 36 & Subsequently Modified The Grounds During The Appeal Hearing On 07/03/2019 & Requested To Take Up The Modified Grounds Instead Of Original Grounds Filed Along With The Appeal Memo. After Hearing Both The Parties We Admit The Modified Grounds For Adjudication. In The Modified Grounds Of Appeal, The Assessee Raised 5 Grounds In Total, All The Grounds Of Appeal Are Related To 2 Modi Shelters Private Ltd., Hyd. The Rejection Of Deduction 80Ib(10) Of The Income Tax Act (In Short ‘The Act’) In Respect Of Palm Springs Project Phase- Ii.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I