AIA ENGINEERING LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

disallowance of same u/s. 80G, if other conditions of Section 80G are fulfilled by observing as follows: “7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses would not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of the Act by inserting Explanation 2

TORRENT POWER GRID LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

disallowance of same u/s. 80G, if other conditions of Section 80G are fulfilled by observing as follows: “7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses would not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of the Act by inserting Explanation 2

VIMAL COAL PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

80G(2)(iiihk) or (iiihl), nevertheless dismissed the assessee's claim.\n7. 2. The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014 inserted Explanation 2 to section 37(1) to\nexplicitly disallow

SEQUEL LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

disallowance of same u/s. 80G, if other conditions of Section 80G are fulfilled by observing as follows: “7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses would not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of the Act by inserting Explanation 2

GUJARAT STATE FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2020-21

disallowed by the assessee under Section 37 of the Act. However, as the contribution to Mukhyamantri Shree Swachchta Nidhi Gujarat for sanitation work was eligible for deduction under Section 80G of the Act, the assessee had rightly claimed the deduction. The Ld. AR has drawn our attention to the provisions of Section 80G(2

GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KHANJI BHAVAN vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN(VEJALPUR), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21

disallowance of the entire CSR expenditure, and a separate claim under section 80G was made, strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Coordinate Bench in Gujarat State Financial Services Ltd. v. DCIT (supra) has held that the restriction under section 80G(2

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

section 143(2)\nwere issued and duly served. The Assessing Officer, after examining the\nmaterial placed on record, made various disallowances and additions under\ndifferent heads, determining the assessed income for each year as set out\nbelow. The Assessing Office completed the assessment by passing order u/s\n143(3) of the Act. The details of the assessment and the additions

TORRENT INVESTMENTS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS TORRENT INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED),AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

disallowing deduction claimed under section 80G of the Act in respect CSR expense, of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (50% of Rs. 2

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

section 143(2)\nwere issued and duly served. The Assessing Officer, after examining the\nmaterial placed on record, made various disallowances and additions under\ndifferent heads, determining the assessed income for each year as set out\nbelow. The Assessing Office completed the assessment by passing order u/s\n143(3) of the Act. The details of the assessment and the additions

VIBRANT ADVERTISING PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the order passed under section 263 of the Act by the Principal CIT is quashed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

80G of the Act, provided all other statutory requirements under that section are met. These decisions have clarified that Explanation 2 to section 37(1), which bars CSR expenses as deductible business expenditure, does not extend to disallowance

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2016-17

2(15) of the Act. The assessee while computing the net profit has claimed as sum of Rs. 3,03,45,000 as donation and charities which was given to four different trusts. The assessee was informed that such induction towards donation will be allowed only on the basis of having recognition under section 80G of the Act. The assessee

PATEL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), SURAT, VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowed as a business expense under Section 37(1) due to Explanation 2 introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014, it remains part of the assessee’s total income and thus eligible for deduction under Chapter VIA, which includes Section 80G

THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA vs. PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD., VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

section 143(2)\nwere issued and duly served. The Assessing Officer, after examining the\nmaterial placed on record, made various disallowances and additions under\ndifferent heads, determining the assessed income for each year as set out\nbelow. The Assessing Office completed the assessment by passing order u/s\n143(3) of the Act. The details of the assessment and the additions

TTEC INDIA CUSTOMER SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Ttec India Customer Solutions Pr.Commissioner Of Private Limited, Ttec Ahmedabad Vs. Income Tax-3 Opp: L.J.College Vejalpur Off: Sg Road, Makarba Ahmedabad. Fatewadi Bo, Fatewadi Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaccm 1005A (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Vishal Kabra, Ar Assessee By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

2 to section 263(1). The PCIT thus set aside the assessment order and directed the AO to pass a fresh assessment order after conducting necessary enquiry and verification and recomputing the income by disallowing the deduction under section 80G

GMM PFAULDER LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.839/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Gmm Pfaulder Ltd. The Pr.Cit बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, B-Jadav Chambers Ahmedabad-1 V/S. Navrangpura H.O. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ashram Road Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcg 0563 A (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ahmedabad-1 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Pr. Cit” For Short] Dated 07/03/2025 Passed In Exercise Of His Revisionary Jurisdiction Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short] For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020- 21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Gmm Pfaulder Ltd. Vs. Pcit Asst. Year : 2020-21 2

Disallowance of deduction claimed amounting to Rs.62,17,634/- under section 80G: 4.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Pr. CIT erred in contending that deduction claimed under section 80G of the Act amounting to Rs.62,17,634/- on account of donation made as part of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), is not allowable

HESTER BIOSCIENCE LIMITED,MEHSANA vs. THE PR.CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

2– 3. The Ld. Pr. CIT has erred in passing the order under section 263 of the Act inasmuch as both the issue of granting deduction under section 80G of the Act and computing income as per the provision of section 115BAA of the Act are adjudicated by the FAO at the time of assessment proceedings and hence same

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2 1 1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HDB FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2020-21

disallowance of Rs.44,94,000/- u/s.14A of the Act without appreciating the fact that the AO was justified in applying Rule 8D(2)(ii) according to the facts of the case? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing deduction of Rs.14,01,31,001/- u/s. 80G

TAPOVAN EDUCATION TRUST,,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CPC,, BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

80G, the trust must be registered u/s. 12A of the I.T. Act. As such, the trust do not fulfill the above condition. Therefore, the trust vide letter dated 26.03.2013 received in this office on 04.04.2013 has withdrawn its application. In view of the above, the application of the trust is treated as rejected for statistical purposes.” ITA Nos. 2310&2311/Ahd/2017