ANUGRAHA EDUCATION TRUST,SULLIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 80G(5) if the institution is found to be misapplying receipts or violating conditions of approval. 2. Rejection of Donor's Claim: The Income Tax Department may disallow

GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowance under section 80G amounting to INR 2,81,50,000 5. Non-allowability of additional claim filed by the Appellant

NORTHERN OPERATING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,ARGON SOUTH TOWER vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5 (1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Northern Operating Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 2Nd Floor Rmz Ecopace, Circle – 5(1)(1), Campus 1C, Bengaluru. Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur, Bengaluru – 560 103. Pan : Aaccn 1652 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Divya Motwani, Ca. Revenue By : Shri. D. K. Mishra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2024

disallowance under section 80G of the Act, vide its directions dated 04.06.2024. Pursuant to the DRP’s directions, the impugned FAO was passed. 5

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. INFOSYS LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

disallowance made under section 10AA of the Act ignoring that since no new master service agreement was made, the benefit of claim u/s 10AA from the old SEZ cannot be allowed. 5. The CIT(A) erred in remitting the matter to assessing officer on issue relating to section 80G

FINASTRA SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No. 189/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Finastra Software Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., 4Th To 6Th Floor, Virgo The Deputy Building, Bagmane Commissioner Of Constellation Income Tax, Business Park Outer Circle – 3 (1)(1), Ring Road, Vs. Bangalore. Dodanekundi, Bangalore. Pan: Aaack9067G Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-03-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2022 For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Final Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2022 Was Not Communicated In The Manner Prescribed Under The Income-Tax Act, 1961 & The Rules Made Thereunder & Therefore The Proceedings Are Null & Void.

disallowance under Section 80G of the Act of Rs. 5,50,000/- as being contributions made by the Appellant towards

FINASTRA SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.It(Tp)A No. 268/Bang/2021 (Assessment Year: 2016-17)

disallowance of claim made under Section 80G of the Act was sustained. 5. Aggrieved by the final assessment order, the assessee

M/S. PEAK XV PARTNERS ADVISORS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowing the claim made by the Appellant under section 80G of the Act, amounting to Rs.57,79,500/-. 4. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in not following the decisions of the jurisdictional Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of allowability of deduction towards Corporate Social Responsibility expenses under Section 80G of the Act. 5

M/S. PEAK XV PARTNERS ADVISORS PRIVATE LIMITED, ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowing the claim made by the Appellant under section 80G of the Act, amounting to Rs.57,79,500/-. 4. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in not following the decisions of the jurisdictional Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of allowability of deduction towards Corporate Social Responsibility expenses under Section 80G of the Act. 5

M/S. FNF INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2016-17

Section 80G of the Act. Therefore, the assessee submitted that it is eligible to claim deduction and the AO has wrongly disallowed the same. 5

FIRST AMERICAN (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Years : 2016 – 17

section 80 G of the Act. 4. Ld.AO thus disallowed the deduction claimed u/s 80G of the Act. 5. Aggrieved

M/S. ALLEGIS SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 1, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016 – 17

disallowance, which is not the intention of Legislature. 19. On the basis of above discussion, in our view, authorities below have erred in denying claim of assessee under section 80G of the Act. We also note that authorities below have not verified nature of payments qualifying exemption under section 80G of the Act and quantum of eligibility as per section

SRI SRINIVASA TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

80G of the Act. The assessee trust is engaged in charitable activities, including education and healthcare. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the donation made by the assessee to another trust on the ground that the recipient trust was not registered under section 12A of the Act. As per the provisions of section 11 of the Act, a charitable trust

SRI SRINIVASA TRUST,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

80G of the Act. The assessee trust is engaged in charitable activities, including education and healthcare. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the donation made by the assessee to another trust on the ground that the recipient trust was not registered under section 12A of the Act. As per the provisions of section 11 of the Act, a charitable trust

JSW INDUSTRIAL GASES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(3)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

80G(5) of the Act on or after 1.10.2009 would be a onetime approval, which would be valid till it is withdrawn. Therefore, in view of the above circular, we are of the opinion that this ground of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is not tenable. 5.2 Further, we take a note of the fact that section

M/S. SLING MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

disallowance, which is not the intention of Legislature. 20. On the basis of above discussion, in our view, authorities below have erred in denying claim of assessee under section 80G of the Act. We also note that authorities below have not verified nature of payments qualifying exemption under section 80G of the Act and quantum of eligibility as per section

M/S. INFINERA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 3, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.2589/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16

5 of 10 7.1 It was submitted that the assessee disallowed the above said payments aggregating to Rs.36,56,801/- while computing income from business. However, it claimed deduction u/s 80G of the Act to the tune of Rs.21,36,801/- as stated in the table above. 7.2 The A.O. took the view that the assessee have made above said

M/S. SRINIVAS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE AND RESEARCH CENTRE,MANGALROE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: N.A.

80G; or] [(iiiab) any university or other educational institution exiting solely for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit, and which is wholly or substantially financed by the Government; or (iiiac) any hospital or other institution for the reception and treatment of persons suffering from illness or mental defectiveness or for the reception and treatment of persons during convalescence

DIVYA DINESH ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowance made by CPC be deleted and the return computation be accepted. . ITA No.2194 & 2195/Bang/2025 Page 5 of 16 7. However, the learned CIT(A) examined the facts of the case, the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act, the rectification order passed under section 154 of the Act, and the submissions of the appellant

SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC IT BUSINESS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE-2, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.185/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18

5. Disallowance of expenditure towards Corporate Social Responsibility u/s 80G of the Act. 5.1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and the law, the Ld. AO/ Ld. DRP erred in proposing disallowance of INR 24,733,027/- towards claim under section