Section 35AC of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 35AC is (1) DCIT v. Working Women's Forum (235 Taxmann 516), cited in 25 of the 104 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 35AC

(1) DCIT v. Working Women's Forum
235 Taxmann 516 · 2015 · Supreme Court
25
citing judgments
Director of Income Tax, Chennai v. Working Women's Forum
63 Taxmann.com 324 · 2015 · Supreme Court
10
citing judgments

In the case of a trust registered under section 12AA, only the part of the income that violates section 13(1)(d) can be taxed at the maximum marginal rate; the entirety of the income cannot be denied exemption under section 11.

Peass Industrial Engineers (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
76 Taxmann.com 106 · 2016 · High Court
8
citing judgments
Silasari Kasivasi Muthukumaraswami Thambiran AVL & Ors. v. Agricultural Income Tax Officer & Ors.
113 ITR 889 · Reported
4
citing judgments
CIT v. Bhagwan Shree Laxmi Narayan Dham Trust
62 Taxmann.com 358 · 2015 · High Court
4
citing judgments
CIT v. Silicon Institute of Technology
370 ITR 567 · 2015 · Reported
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 35AC

P.M. Bhimani Orgochem Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2586/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

Manthan Inc, Mumbai vs. ACIT- Cir 19(2), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2942/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Dilip DiwanFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma
Section 35A

Jalaj Ashwin Dani, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-15(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5375/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Dalpat Shah (AR)For Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad (DR)
Section 154Section 234BSection 234DSection 35ASection 80G

Shri. Bhanwarlal H Chandak, Mumbai vs. ITO 35(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 4815/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 4815/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2014-15) Shri Bhanwarlal H. Chandak, Ito-35(1)(2), Room No. 904, 9Th Floor, 9-A, Giri Apartment, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (East), C-41 To C-43, G Block, बनाम Mumbai-400059 Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, /Vs. Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) ("ितवाद" /Respondent) Pan No. Aavpc9789M अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Kumar U. Kale, Advocate "ितवाद" "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Sanjay J. Sethi सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 03/06/2021 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 10/08/2021 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, J.M: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-46, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 01.05.2019 For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2014-15. 2. Shri Kumar U. Kale Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted That The Solitary Ground Raised By The Assessee In Appeal Is Against The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,25,000/- Claimed By The Assessee/Appellant As Deduction Under Section 80Gga Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’]. The Ld. Counsel Narrating Facts Of The Case Submitted That, The Assessee Had Made

For Appellant: Sh. Kumar U. Kale, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay J. Sethi
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35ASection 80G

Pramod Bajaj, Kolkata vs. PCIT-10, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 444/KOL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. Nos.443&444/Kol/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16& 2016-17 Pramod Bajaj ………..………..…...………………………….……Appellant 137, Flat No.5C, 5Th Floor, S.P. Mukherjee Road Kolkata-700026. [Pan:Aeapb6237L] Vs. Pcit-10, Kolkata………………………………...………..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manish Kanojia, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 05, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 06, 2021 Order Per Bench: By This Common Order, We Will Dispose Off Two Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Contesting The Revision Orders U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act Both Dated 20.02.2020 Relevant To Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2016-17 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-10, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As “Pcit’) 2. No One Has Put In Appearance On Behalf Of The Assessee. However, After Going Through The Impugned Orders & The Available Records On The Files & After Hearing The Ld. Dr, We Proceed To Adjudicate The Captioned Appeals. 3. First, We Will Take Up The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.443/Kol/2020 Relevant To Assessment Year 2015-16. Ita No.443/Kol/2020 Assessment Year 2015-16 – 4. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Contested The Invocation Of Revision Jurisdiction By The Ld. Pcit U/S 263 Of The Act, Whereby,He Has Set Aside The Assessment Order Of The Assessing Officer For De Novo Assessment.

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35A

Pramod Bajaj, Kolkata vs. PCIT-10, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 443/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. Nos.443&444/Kol/2020 Assessment Years: 2015-16& 2016-17 Pramod Bajaj ………..………..…...………………………….……Appellant 137, Flat No.5C, 5Th Floor, S.P. Mukherjee Road Kolkata-700026. [Pan:Aeapb6237L] Vs. Pcit-10, Kolkata………………………………...………..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manish Kanojia, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 05, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 06, 2021 Order Per Bench: By This Common Order, We Will Dispose Off Two Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Contesting The Revision Orders U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act Both Dated 20.02.2020 Relevant To Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2016-17 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-10, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As “Pcit’) 2. No One Has Put In Appearance On Behalf Of The Assessee. However, After Going Through The Impugned Orders & The Available Records On The Files & After Hearing The Ld. Dr, We Proceed To Adjudicate The Captioned Appeals. 3. First, We Will Take Up The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.443/Kol/2020 Relevant To Assessment Year 2015-16. Ita No.443/Kol/2020 Assessment Year 2015-16 – 4. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Contested The Invocation Of Revision Jurisdiction By The Ld. Pcit U/S 263 Of The Act, Whereby,He Has Set Aside The Assessment Order Of The Assessing Officer For De Novo Assessment.

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35A

Apl Apollo Tubes Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), New Delhi

In the result, • The appeal of the revenue A

ITA 9395/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4553/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Acit, Vs Apl Apollo Tubes Ltd., Circle-3(1), D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110049 (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacb0960D With Co No. 223/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Apl Apollo Tubes Ltd., Vs Acit, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, Circle-3(1), New Delhi-110049 New Delhi-110002 (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacb0960D

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 35ASection 80G

ACIT, Circle-3(1), New Delhi vs. Apl Apollo Tubes Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, • The appeal of the revenue A

ITA 4553/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4553/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Acit, Vs Apl Apollo Tubes Ltd., Circle-3(1), D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110049 (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacb0960D With Co No. 223/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Apl Apollo Tubes Ltd., Vs Acit, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, Circle-3(1), New Delhi-110049 New Delhi-110002 (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacb0960D

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 35ASection 80G

M/S Asia Star Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 2 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7667/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2021AY 2015-16
Section 139Section 35ASection 80G

M.P. Beer Products Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5943/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M.Balaganeshआअसं. 5943/मुं/2014 (िन. व. 2004-05) M.P. Beer Products Ltd. 601, Maker Chamber-V, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan: Aabcm0354P ...... अपीलाथ+ /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(2), Mumbai. ..... ,ितवाद./Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen
Section 271(1)(c)Section 35A

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mmtc Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ground No. 5 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 2981/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit, Vs. Mmtc Ltd, Circle-16(2), Core-1, Scope Complex-7, New Delhi Industrial Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaacm1433E (Appellant) (Respondent) Mmtc Ltd, Vs. Addl. Cit, Core-1, Scope Complex-7, Range-5, Industrial Area, Lodhi Road, New New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaacm1433E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 35Section 35ASection 80GSection 92C

Mmtc Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, ground No. 5 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 2074/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit, Vs. Mmtc Ltd, Circle-16(2), Core-1, Scope Complex-7, New Delhi Industrial Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaacm1433E (Appellant) (Respondent) Mmtc Ltd, Vs. Addl. Cit, Core-1, Scope Complex-7, Range-5, Industrial Area, Lodhi Road, New New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaacm1433E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 35Section 35ASection 80GSection 92C

Dilip Shashikant Zaveri, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result assessee's appeals are allowed

ITA 4709/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ramlal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhle
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35A

Dilip Shashikant Zaveri, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result assessee's appeals are allowed

ITA 4708/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ramlal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhle
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35A

Met Pro Chemicals, Mumbai vs. ITO 17 (2)(5), Mumbai

In the result appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1511/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2021AY 2010-11
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35ASection 3S

Oc Specialties Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 10(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee are disposed of by treating the same as withdrawn

ITA 3988/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2021AY 2012-13
Section 2Section 3Section 35ASection 4Section 5Section 6Section 9

ITO, Muzaffarnagar vs. M/S G.S> Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6146/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 143(3)Section 35Section 35ASection 68Section 80

Bhavita Chemicals Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO - 6(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3665/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3665/मुं/2019 ("न.व.2010-11) Bhavita Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., 208, Alankar Building, Samuel Street, Masjit Bunder,Mumbai 400 009 : अपीलाथ"/ Appellant Pan:Aaacb2209B बनाम/ Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj PanditFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay J. Sethi
Section 143(3)Section 35A

Mudra Share Stock Brokers Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 4(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result is appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2363/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2020AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 35ASection 80G

M/S Suindu & Co., Mumbai vs. Asst. CIT 17(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1476/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.1476/मुं/2019 ("न.व.2010-11) M/S. Suindu & Co., 33, Jupiter Building, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005. : अपीलाथ"/ Appellant Pan: Aacfs5934P बनाम/ Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax-17(3), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 : ""थ"/ Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms Smita Verma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Smita Verma
Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 35A