Is there any way to get certainty on a fund's section 9A eligibility in advance, instead of arguing it years later on assessment?
Yes, and it is optional. Rule 10VA(1) provides that an investment fund may at its option seek the approval of the Board regarding its eligibility for the purposes of section 9A. The application is made in writing, with relevant documents and evidence, to the Member of the CBDT having supervision and control over the Foreign Tax and Tax Research Division, three months before the beginning of the previous year for which approval is sought, and the Board must dispose of it within sixty days from the end of the month in which it was made.
Decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text) on 2025-04-01, reported as Rule 10VA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. It bears on section Rule 10VA, section 9A, section Rule 10V of the Income Tax Act 1961, in Residence & Treaty Benefit and Assessment & Scrutiny matters.
The practical value of the approval is in sub-rules (8) and (9). The approval, once granted, applies for the previous year applied for AND for subsequent previous years unless withdrawn, so it is not an annual exercise; and rule 10VA(9) provides in terms that the benefit of section 9A shall not be denied to an approved fund for any previous year for which the approval is in force and has not been withdrawn. That converts an open-ended, thirteen-condition annual argument into a status that the department must withdraw before it can be attacked, and withdrawal is itself constrained: rule 10VA(10) permits it only where the approval was obtained by misrepresentation of facts or fraud, or the conditions in section 9A are not fulfilled, or a condition subject to which approval was granted has been violated, and rule 10VA(11) forbids any order rejecting an application or withdrawing an approval without an opportunity of being heard. The timing rule is the trap: the application must be made three months BEFORE the beginning of the previous year for which approval is sought, so a fund that decides in June that it wants approval for the current year is already too late for that year. The same rule 10VA machinery is also the route by which a fund can get a below-floor manager's fee blessed, because the second proviso to rule 10V(12) routes that application to the same Member of the Board.
Binding on the department, not on the assessee or the courts. An assessee may rely on a circular that is beneficial to them.
Read aloud by your device. Press again to stop.
Not a case. Rule 10VA(1) makes the approval optional: an investment fund may at its option seek approval of the Board regarding its eligibility for the purposes of section 9A. Sub-rule (2) provides for a written application, enclosing relevant documents and evidence, to the Member, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi having supervision and control over the work of the Foreign Tax and Tax Research (FT&TR) Division. Sub-rule (3) requires the application to be made three months before the beginning of the previous year for which the fund seeks the approval. Sub-rule (4) provides for a committee notified by the Board to examine the application and submit its recommendations regarding grant of approval or otherwise and the conditions, if any, subject to which approval is to be granted. Sub-rule (5) provides that the committee shall be headed by a Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner and consist of two other income-tax authorities not below the rank of Commissioner. Sub-rule (6) empowers the committee, on behalf of the Board, to call for documents or information from the investment fund and further details or information from the fund as well as from income-tax authorities and other departments or agencies. Sub-rule (12) requires a copy of the order rejecting the application or withdrawing the approval to be communicated to the fund as well as to the Assessing Officer and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner having jurisdiction over the fund.
Sub-rule (7) requires the Board, on the basis of the committee's recommendations, within sixty days from the end of the month in which the application was made, either to grant approval to the fund by an order in writing subject to such conditions as it may deem fit, or to reject the application for reasons to be recorded in writing. Sub-rule (8) provides that the approval once granted, subject to any condition specified in that behalf, shall be applicable for the previous year referred to in sub-rule (3) and subsequent previous years unless it is withdrawn by the Board. Sub-rule (9) provides that the benefit of section 9A shall not be denied to an eligible investment fund which has been granted approval, for any previous year for which the approval is in force and has not been withdrawn. Sub-rule (10) permits the Board to withdraw the approval if satisfied that (a) the approval was obtained on the basis of misrepresentation of facts or fraud, or (b) the conditions mentioned in section 9A are not fulfilled, or (c) any condition subject to which approval was granted has been violated. Sub-rule (11) provides that no order rejecting the application or withdrawing the approval shall be passed without giving an opportunity of being heard.
Not a judicial route. Section 9A(8) leaves the manner of application of the section to guidelines the Board may prescribe, and rule 10VA is the part of that machinery that deals with certainty rather than compliance. The design mirrors an advance ruling without being one: an optional application, a specialist committee, a fixed disposal period, a written order with reasons on refusal, and a status that carries forward. The conditions on withdrawal in sub-rule (10) and the mandatory hearing in sub-rule (11) are what give the approval its value, because without them the approval would be no more than an opinion the department could depart from on assessment. Sub-rule (12), which requires the order to be communicated to the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner having jurisdiction, closes the loop by putting the assessing side on notice of the status the fund holds.
The benefit of section 9A shall not be denied to an eligible investment fund, which has been granted approval, for any previous year for which the approval is in force and has not been withdrawn.
Upload it and we will read it, work out your deadline and draft the reply. A CA reviews before anything is filed.
Handle my notice → Ask a CA on WhatsAppYes, and it is optional. Rule 10VA(1) provides that an investment fund may at its option seek the approval of the Board regarding its eligibility for the purposes of section 9A. The application is made in writing, with relevant documents and evidence, to the Member of the CBDT having supervision and control over the Foreign Tax and Tax Research Division, three months before the beginning of the previous year for which approval is sought, and the Board must dispose of it within sixty days from the end of the month in which it was made. This was decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text) and bears on section Rule 10VA, section 9A, section Rule 10V of the Income Tax Act 1961. It is reported as Rule 10VA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The practical value of the approval is in sub-rules (8) and (9). The approval, once granted, applies for the previous year applied for AND for subsequent previous years unless withdrawn, so it is not an annual exercise; and rule 10VA(9) provides in terms that the benefit of section 9A shall not be denied to an approved fund for any previous year for which the approval is in force and has not been withdrawn. That converts an open-ended, thirteen-condition annual argument into a status that the department must withdraw before it can be attacked, and withdrawal is itself constrained: rule 10VA(10) permits it only where the approval was obtained by misrepresentation of facts or fraud, or the conditions in section 9A are not fulfilled, or a condition subject to which approval was granted has been violated, and rule 10VA(11) forbids any order rejecting an application or withdrawing an approval without an opportunity of being heard. The timing rule is the trap: the application must be made three months BEFORE the beginning of the previous year for which approval is sought, so a fund that decides in June that it wants approval for the current year is already too late for that year. The same rule 10VA machinery is also the route by which a fund can get a below-floor manager's fee blessed, because the second proviso to rule 10V(12) routes that application to the same Member of the Board. If it applies to you, the first step is this: If the structure is being set up, put the rule 10VA application in more than three months before the start of the first previous year for which the safe harbour matters — the three-month lead time in sub-rule (3) is the whole of the timing rule.
Not a case. Rule 10VA(1) makes the approval optional: an investment fund may at its option seek approval of the Board regarding its eligibility for the purposes of section 9A. Sub-rule (2) provides for a written application, enclosing relevant documents and evidence, to the Member, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi having supervision and control over the work of the Foreign Tax and Tax Research (FT&TR) Division. Sub-rule (3) requires the application to be made three months before the beginning of the previous year for which the fund seeks the approval. Sub-rule (4) provides for a committee notified by the Board to examine the application and submit its recommendations regarding grant of approval or otherwise and the conditions, if any, subject to which approval is to be granted. Sub-rule (5) provides that the committee shall be headed by a Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner and consist of two other income-tax authorities not below the rank of Commissioner. Sub-rule (6) empowers the committee, on behalf of the Board, to call for documents or information from the investment fund and further details or information from the fund as well as from income-tax authorities and other departments or agencies. Sub-rule (12) requires a copy of the order rejecting the application or withdrawing the approval to be communicated to the fund as well as to the Assessing Officer and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner having jurisdiction over the fund. The matter was decided on 2025-04-01 by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text). On those facts the CBDT Circulars & Instructions held as follows. Sub-rule (7) requires the Board, on the basis of the committee's recommendations, within sixty days from the end of the month in which the application was made, either to grant approval to the fund by an order in writing subject to such conditions as it may deem fit, or to reject the application for reasons to be recorded in writing. Sub-rule (8) provides that the approval once granted, subject to any condition specified in that behalf, shall be applicable for the previous year referred to in sub-rule (3) and subsequent previous years unless it is withdrawn by the Board. Sub-rule (9) provides that the benefit of section 9A shall not be denied to an eligible investment fund which has been granted approval, for any previous year for which the approval is in force and has not been withdrawn. Sub-rule (10) permits the Board to withdraw the approval if satisfied that (a) the approval was obtained on the basis of misrepresentation of facts or fraud, or (b) the conditions mentioned in section 9A are not fulfilled, or (c) any condition subject to which approval was granted has been violated. Sub-rule (11) provides that no order rejecting the application or withdrawing the approval shall be passed without giving an opportunity of being heard.
Not a judicial route. Section 9A(8) leaves the manner of application of the section to guidelines the Board may prescribe, and rule 10VA is the part of that machinery that deals with certainty rather than compliance. The design mirrors an advance ruling without being one: an optional application, a specialist committee, a fixed disposal period, a written order with reasons on refusal, and a status that carries forward. The conditions on withdrawal in sub-rule (10) and the mandatory hearing in sub-rule (11) are what give the approval its value, because without them the approval would be no more than an opinion the department could depart from on assessment. Sub-rule (12), which requires the order to be communicated to the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner having jurisdiction, closes the loop by putting the assessing side on notice of the status the fund holds. In the words reproduced by the source cited on this page: "The benefit of section 9A shall not be denied to an eligible investment fund, which has been granted approval, for any previous year for which the approval is in force and has not been withdrawn."
It was decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions on 2025-04-01 and is reported as Rule 10VA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Binding on the department, not on the assessee or the courts. An assessee may rely on a circular that is beneficial to them. A CBDT circular or instruction binds officers of the department but not the assessee and not the courts. Where a circular helps you, you may hold the department to it. Where it hurts you, it cannot override the Act or a judgment. On section Rule 10VA, section 9A, section Rule 10V, the practical question is whether the facts of your own notice match the facts of this case closely enough for the same rule to apply.
It cuts both ways and is cited by both sides. Sub-rule (7) requires the Board, on the basis of the committee's recommendations, within sixty days from the end of the month in which the application was made, either to grant approval to the fund by an order in writing subject to such conditions as it may deem fit, or to reject the application for reasons to be recorded in writing. Sub-rule (8) provides that the approval once granted, subject to any condition specified in that behalf, shall be applicable for the previous year referred to in sub-rule (3) and subsequent previous years unless it is withdrawn by the Board. Sub-rule (9) provides that the benefit of section 9A shall not be denied to an eligible investment fund which has been granted approval, for any previous year for which the approval is in force and has not been withdrawn. Sub-rule (10) permits the Board to withdraw the approval if satisfied that (a) the approval was obtained on the basis of misrepresentation of facts or fraud, or (b) the conditions mentioned in section 9A are not fulfilled, or (c) any condition subject to which approval was granted has been violated. Sub-rule (11) provides that no order rejecting the application or withdrawing the approval shall be passed without giving an opportunity of being heard. It arises in Residence & Treaty Benefit and Assessment & Scrutiny matters, on section Rule 10VA, section 9A, section Rule 10V of the Income Tax Act 1961, and was decided by Not applicable — statutory text. Before relying on it, read the source linked on this page and check whether it has since been distinguished, overruled or overtaken by an amendment to the Income Tax Act. In practice the steps that follow from it are these. Address the application in writing to the Member, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi, having supervision and control over the work of the Foreign Tax and Tax Research (FT&TR) Division, and enclose the documents and evidence, as sub-rule (2) requires. Expect a committee stage: sub-rules (4) to (6) put the application before a committee headed by a Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner with two other authorities not below the rank of Commissioner, which may call for documents and information from the fund and from other departments and agencies. Hold the Board to the sixty-day period in sub-rule (7), which runs from the end of the month in which the application was made, and note that the Board must either grant approval, with conditions if it thinks fit, or reject it for reasons recorded in writing. If an approval is threatened with withdrawal, take the grounds point first: sub-rule (10) permits withdrawal only on the three grounds it lists, and sub-rule (11) makes a hearing mandatory before any rejection or withdrawal. Where the manager's fee is below the rule 10V(12) floor, use the second proviso to that sub-rule and apply to the same Member of the Board for approval of the lower amount; the third proviso applies rule 10VA(3) to (12) to such an application mutatis mutandis. Keep the approval order and any conditions attached to it on the permanent file — sub-rule (8) makes the approval run into subsequent years, so its conditions have to be monitored every year, not just in the year of grant.
Still good law. The date in 'decided_on' is a placeholder and not a commencement: it is borrowed from the version of section 9A read alongside this rule and carries no legislative meaning for rule 10VA. The same date appears as a genuine commencement date on other entries, which is a reason to state the difference here. Validity could not be fully checked. The rule was read in its published form, which carries no date, so nothing on its face shows whether it has been amended since it was made, and no amending notification was located. The cross-reference relied on in the steps above — the second and third provisos to rule 10V(12), which route a below-floor remuneration application to the same Member of the Board and apply rule 10VA(3) to (12) to it — was read in the text of rule 10V. No judicial decision on rule 10VA was located. The whole of rule 10VA was re-read in an independent reproduction and came back word for word identical, with the same twelve sub-rules. That is a route independent of the publisher of the first text, and it is the strongest currency check available for a rule that carries no date of its own. It is still not a substitute for the notification, and a fund about to apply should obtain the rule as notified, together with any amendment to it, before settling the application, since the form and the addressee are fixed by the rule and a misdirected application wastes the three-month window. No source could be cited for that finding. Checking whether an authority still stands matters as much as knowing what it held: a decision may be overruled on one point and survive on another, or the provision it interprets may have been amended since. Read the source and the editor's note on this page before relying on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal.
This is a statutory entry, not a decision, and 'decided_on' is not a decision date. Rule 10VA could not be dated: the published text of the rule carries no date, unlike a section, so there is nothing on its face from which its currency can be established, and the date 1 April 2025 is a placeholder equal to the commencement of the version of section 9A read alongside it. Dating the rule against the notification that made it, and against any amending notification, remains to be done. Whether the committee referred to in sub-rule (4) has in fact been notified has not been checked, and nothing is said about any approval granted or refused under the rule. The tier value 'cbdt' is used because the library's fixed tier vocabulary has no value for a statutory entry; the source is the rule as published, not a Board circular. Three things a reader should carry. The approval is optional in terms, and that is the whole of sub-rule (1). A fund that does not apply is not thereby ineligible; it simply has no ruling to rely on, and its eligibility will be examined in the ordinary course. The value of an approval is certainty before the year begins, not entitlement. The timing is unforgiving. The application is to be made three months before the beginning of the previous year for which approval is sought, and the Board is to dispose of it within sixty days from the end of the month in which it was made. A fund that misses the three months has lost that year, whatever the merits, and the period is fixed by the rule rather than by any officer's discretion. And the rule is procedure only. The conditions of eligibility are in section 9A itself, and rule 10V supplies the definitions and the further conditions that go with them; nothing in rule 10VA relaxes any of them. An application that is well presented but fails a condition of section 9A will be refused, and the refusal, together with any withdrawal of an approval already granted, is communicated not only to the fund but to the Assessing Officer and to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner having jurisdiction over it, which is worth knowing before an application is made, because a refusal reaches the assessing side of the Department whether or not the fund tells it. This library shows the verification state of every entry openly. This entry has not yet been read in full by a chartered accountant. The summary reflects the sources listed on this page. Read the source before you rely on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
Sub-rule (7) requires the Board, on the basis of the committee's recommendations, within sixty days from the end of the month in which the application was made, either to grant approval to the fund by an order in writing subject to such conditions as it may deem fit, or to reject the application for reasons to be recorded in writing. Sub-rule (8) provides that the approval once granted, subject to any condition specified in that behalf, shall be applicable for the previous year referred to in sub-rule (3) and subsequent previous years unless it is withdrawn by the Board. Sub-rule (9) provides that the benefit of section 9A shall not be denied to an eligible investment fund which has been granted approval, for any previous year for which the approval is in force and has not been withdrawn. Sub-rule (10) permits the Board to withdraw the approval if satisfied that (a) the approval was obtained on the basis of misrepresentation of facts or fraud, or (b) the conditions mentioned in section 9A are not fulfilled, or (c) any condition subject to which approval was granted has been violated. Sub-rule (11) provides that no order rejecting the application or withdrawing the approval shall be passed without giving an opportunity of being heard.
TaxSphere, “Statutory position — rule 10VA: the optional CBDT approval that locks in a fund's section 9A eligibility”, https://taxnotice.vittsphere.com/caselaw/case/statutory-position-rule-10va-cbdt-approval-of-an-eligible-investment-fund/ (validity last checked 2026-09-08)
The judgment itself is a government work and may be quoted freely. The summary, the validity note and the reasoning on this page are this library's own writing: quote them with attribution, and please do not present either as the words of the court — this page keeps the two apart and so should a quotation of it.
Every entry in this library links to where it was found, so you can check it yourself rather than take our word for it.
I am setting up an India-based manager for an offshore fund. What does the manager himself have to satisfy, and is there a floor on the fee the fund must pay him?
My offshore fund breached one of the section 9A(3) conditions for part of the year, and one of its investors is itself a pooling vehicle. Is the safe harbour lost for the whole year?
The offshore fund I advise has no Indian income and files no return here. Does it still have to file anything because it uses an Indian fund manager?
We want to move an offshore fund's assets into a GIFT City vehicle and issue units in the new fund to the existing investors. Does that trigger capital gains, either for the fund or for the investors?
