BharatTax.co — Knowledge Portal
35

ITA 1961 · Section 35

Section 35 — Expenditure on Scientific Research

STATUTORY ARCHITECTURE — 18-ROW MAP

Function in the statutory architecture

Section 35 allows deductions for expenditure on scientific research. Revenue expenditure on scientific research related to the business is deductible, and salary and materials spent in the three years before commencement are treated as spent in the year the business starts, to the extent certified by the prescribed authority. Capital expenditure on such research incurred after 31-3-1967 is deducted in full in the year incurred, but not the cost of land acquired after 29-2-1984.

Sums paid to approved and notified research associations, universities, colleges or institutions for scientific research (clause (ii)), or for social science or statistical research (clause (iii)), and to approved research companies (clause (iia)), are deductible. A company in bio-technology or manufacturing (other than Eleventh Schedule articles) gets a deduction for expenditure, other than on land or building, on an approved in-house research facility under sub-section (2AB). Clause (ii), sub-section (2AA) and sub-section (2AB) state the deduction as one and one-half times the amount, but for previous years relevant to assessment years beginning on or after 1-4-2021 the deduction is equal to the sum paid or expenditure incurred.

Operative consequences

  • The donee must file prescribed statements and issue a certificate to the donor; otherwise the donor’s deduction is not allowed (sub-section (1A)).
  • A donor’s deduction is not denied merely because the donee’s approval is withdrawn after the payment (Explanation to sub-section (1); Explanation 1 to sub-section (2AA)).
  • Where capital expenditure is deducted, no depreciation is allowed on the asset under s. 32(1)(ii) (sub-section (2)(iv)); unabsorbed capital deductions are carried forward like depreciation (sub-section (4)).
  • Expenditure deducted under sub-section (2AA) or (2AB) is not deductible under any other provision.
  • Disputes over whether an activity is scientific research go to the Central Government or the prescribed authority, whose decision is final (sub-section (3)).

Status

The section is operative for AY 2026-27. The Finance Act, 2026 does not amend this section.

The 1961 Act governs AY 2026-27 and earlier assessment years; the Income-tax Act, 2025 governs tax year 2026-27 onwards. For this subject, the 2025 Act provision is s. 45.

Case Laws & Commentary

SECTION 35 — Expenditure on scientific research

Important Case Laws — 1961 Treatise (FA 2026)

Provision in brief: Allows deduction for: (i) revenue expenditure on scientific research related to business; (ii) contribution to approved research association, university, college, IIT, etc. (with weighted deduction historically, now 100% for AY 2021-22 onwards under the second proviso to s. 35(1)(ii)); (iii) capital expenditure on scientific research (other than land) — fully allowable u/s 35(2)(ia); (iv) in-house research (sub-s. (2AB)) — earlier weighted 150%/200% deductions, now 100% w.e.f. FY 2020-21; conditions of DSIR approval and Form 3CL apply. Cl. 35(2AA) — payments to National Laboratory, IIT etc. Sub-s. (3): reference of questions by the Board to the Central Government or the prescribed authority. Sub-s. (2)(ii)-(iii): cessation of use or sale of a pre-1967 asset. Sub-s. (5): transfer of a scientific-research asset in a scheme of amalgamation.

Section Commentary

Backbone of R&D incentives

Section 35 is the principal R&D-incentive provision: it allows (i) revenue R&D expenditure on the assessee's own scientific research related to business (sub-s. (1)(i)), (ii) donations to approved external research bodies — universities, IIT, IISc, approved research association etc. (sub-s. (1)(ii) / (iia) / (iii)), (iii) capital R&D expenditure other than on land (sub-s. (1)(iv) read with sub-s. (2)), and (iv) the once-flagship 'weighted' in-house R&D deduction for company assessees under sub-s. (2AB).

Sunset of weighted deductions — AY 2021-22 watershed

Until FY 2019-20, sub-s. (2AB) gave a 150% / 200% weighted deduction (200% till FY 2016-17, 150% from FY 2017-18) to companies for in-house R&D recognised by DSIR. Provisos to ss. 35(1)(ii), 35(2AA) and 35(2AB)(1) bring these deductions to 100% for AY 2021-22 onwards. The practitioner servicing pharma / auto / chemical / IT clients must understand the AY-wise rate to compute correctly for ongoing litigation across earlier years.

Scope of 'scientific research'

Defined in s. 43(4) as 'any activities for the extension of knowledge in the fields of natural or applied science including agriculture, animal husbandry or fisheries'. Mastek (Ahd ITAT) and a long ITAT line confirm that software / IT R&D, biotech, agri-tech all qualify. The scope is much wider than the lay 'laboratory' image — process improvement, product enhancement, prototype testing, clinical-trial design all qualify if the underlying purpose is extension of knowledge.

DSIR mechanics — Mahindra / Sandan Vikas line

For sub-s. (2AB) the assessee must (i) be a company, (ii) operate a recognised in-house R&D facility (DSIR Form 3CK approval), (iii) get the quantum of expenditure certified annually by DSIR in Form 3CL. Mahindra & Mahindra holds that expenditure incurred outside the facility (vendor-premises testing) on the approved programme qualifies — DSIR approval is purpose-based, not strictly location-based. Sandan Vikas holds that belated Form 3CL cannot defeat substantive entitlement — substantial compliance suffices.

Donations — donor-protection principle

Jindal Steel & Power (P&H) and the Chotatingrai Tea (SC) line establish that retrospective withdrawal of donee's approval cannot defeat donor's claim if the donee held valid approval at the time of donation. The donor's entitlement crystallises on the date of donation. The Explanation to s. 35(1) states that the deduction 'shall not be denied merely on the ground' that the donee's approval was withdrawn after the payment.

Capital R&D — s. 35(2)(ia)

Capital expenditure on R&D (other than land) is fully allowable in the year of incurrence under s. 35(1)(iv) read with s. 35(2)(ia) — no five-year amortisation, no depreciation under s. 32. Wheels India (Mad) confirms that even buildings used wholly for R&D qualify for full deduction, displacing s. 32. Section 35(2)(iv) bars simultaneous depreciation.

Practical compliance for CA

(i) Maintain DSIR approval letter and renewal trail. (ii) Segregate R&D expenditure books — capital vs revenue, in-house vs sub-contracted. (iii) Form 3CL filing — coordinate with DSIR liaison. (iv) For donations, obtain donee's Form 58/79IF certificate, verify approval status on the IT department portal. (v) Avoid double-claim under s. 37 / s. 32 for amounts claimed under s. 35 — Talisma Corpn. confirms mutual exclusivity. (vi) Form 3CD Cl. 19 captures s. 35 claims.

FA 2026 impact: No fresh FA 2026 amendment. Note: for AY 2021-22 onwards, all weighted (150%/175%/200%) deductions have come down to 100%. FA 2025 made no change.

Leading Decisions

1. CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.

Citation: (2009) 313 ITR 263 (Bom)

Forum: Bombay High Court

Facts & Issue: Assessee claimed weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) for in-house R&D expenditure. Some expenditure was incurred outside the approved R&D facility (at vendors' premises for prototype testing). Revenue restricted weighted deduction to expenditure incurred AT the approved facility.

Held / Ratio: Held that s. 35(2AB) is purpose-based, not facility-based. So long as the expenditure is incurred ON in-house R&D approved by DSIR, the precise physical location is not decisive — vendor-premises testing forming part of the approved programme qualifies. The Court emphasised the policy of incentivising R&D and rejected hyper-technical restriction.

Section relevance: Important authority on scope of s. 35(2AB) — purpose vs location.

2. CIT v. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd.

Citation: (2011) 335 ITR 117 (Del)

Forum: Delhi High Court

Facts & Issue: Assessee had DSIR approval as a recognized in-house R&D facility, but Form 3CL (quantification certificate from DSIR) was issued belatedly. Revenue denied weighted deduction.

Held / Ratio: Held that Form 3CL is a procedural certificate; substantive entitlement under s. 35(2AB) flows from recognition. Belated issuance of Form 3CL cannot defeat the claim if the expenditure and recognition are otherwise established. Substantial compliance suffices.

Section relevance: Procedural-vs-substantive distinction under s. 35(2AB) — frequently invoked.

3. DCIT v. Mastek Ltd.

Citation: (2012) 25 taxmann.com 133 (Ahd ITAT)

Forum: ITAT Ahmedabad

Facts & Issue: Software-development company claimed weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB). Revenue contended that software development is not 'scientific research'.

Held / Ratio: Held that 'scientific research' u/s 43(4) is broad — includes development of new processes, products and is not confined to laboratory science. Software R&D, when recognised by DSIR, qualifies. The case is regularly cited for IT-sector R&D claims.

Section relevance: Defines 'scientific research' for IT/software industry under s. 43(4) feeding into s. 35.

4. CIT v. Wheels India Ltd.

Citation: (2011) 336 ITR 513 (Mad)

Forum: Madras High Court

Facts & Issue: Capital expenditure on R&D (other than land) — claimed u/s 35(1)(iv) read with s. 35(2). Revenue contended that building used for R&D was eligible only for depreciation u/s 32.

Held / Ratio: Held that capital expenditure on R&D, including buildings used wholly for R&D, qualifies for full deduction u/s 35(1)(iv) / 35(2)(ia) — to the exclusion of s. 32 depreciation. Once allowed u/s 35, depreciation cannot be claimed simultaneously (s. 35(2)(iv)).

Section relevance: Standard authority on capital expenditure under s. 35 vs depreciation under s. 32.

5. CIT v. Talisma Corpn. (P) Ltd.

Citation: (2012) 247 CTR 226 (Kar)

Forum: Karnataka High Court

Facts & Issue: Question of overlap — assessee claimed s. 35(2AB) on expenditure that was also claimed under regular PGBP heads (s. 37). Revenue denied to avoid double benefit.

Held / Ratio: Held that there is no question of double deduction — the assessee is entitled either to claim under s. 35(2AB) (with weighted deduction, then) or under s. 37 (at 100%). Once claimed under s. 35(2AB), the same expenditure cannot also reduce profits under s. 37. The system is mutually exclusive.

Section relevance: Defines mutual exclusivity of s. 35 and s. 37 — avoids double-counting.

6. CIT v. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd.

Citation: (2017) 88 taxmann.com 220 (P&H)

Forum: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Facts & Issue: Donation to an approved research association (s. 35(1)(ii)) — Revenue alleged that the institution's approval was later withdrawn retrospectively, hence weighted deduction should not be allowed.

Held / Ratio: Held that retrospective withdrawal of approval of the donee institution cannot defeat the donor's claim, since at the time of donation the assessee acted in good faith on a valid certificate. The Court relied on the principle that a donor's entitlement crystallises at the time of donation. (The Explanation to s. 35(1) provides that the deduction shall not be denied merely because the approval was withdrawn after the payment.)

Section relevance: Important for handling withdrawn-approval cases under s. 35(1)(ii) / (iia) / (iii). Read with the Explanation to s. 35(1).

— End of Section 35 Case-Law Note —

Case law on Section 35

ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments applying this section, on BharatTax.net, our income tax case law search.