Section 80C of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.123

Section 80C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 123 (Deduction for life insurance premia, deferred annuity, contributions to provident fund, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 123 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 80C is Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Delco India Pvt. Ltd. (67 Taxmann.com 357), cited in 42 of the 658 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80C

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Delco India Pvt. Ltd.
67 Taxmann.com 357 · 2016 · High Court
42
citing judgments

Additions made on the basis of WhatsApp chats or loose papers seized during a search can be deleted if the assessee proves they were not involved in those transactions and the evidence lacks substantiation. The burden of proof lies with the revenue to connect the seized material to the assessee.

Ramco Cements Ltd. v. DCIT
373 ITR 146 · 2015 · High Court
28
citing judgments

An assessee can make a claim of deduction for the first time before the appellate authorities.

CIT v. Surinder Pal Anand, Surinder Pal Anand
242 CTR 61 · 2011 · High Court
20
citing judgments

When an assessee opts for the presumptive taxation scheme under Section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, offering income at a specified percentage of gross receipts, they are exempt from maintaining books of account and are not obligated to explain individual entries of cash deposits unless such entries lack nexus with the gross receipts.

Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mamta Agarwal
171 Taxmann.com 54 · 2025 · Supreme Court
10
citing judgments
Mrs. Meera Jacob v. ITO
313 ITR 411 · 2009 · High Court
6
citing judgments
401 ITR 215. (b) Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai v. Janak Shantilal Mehta
124 Taxmann.com 516 · 2021 · High Court
4
citing judgments
V.M. Salgaonkar & Brother (P) Ltd. v. ACIT
281 CTR 191 · 2015 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 80C

Manak Garg, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 59(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 3498/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2010-11 Manak Garg (Individual), Vs. Ito, Ward 59(1), F-17, West Vinod Nagar, New Delhi Delhi-1100 92 Pan: Aaccn8595N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 80C

Narendra Seoomal Sabnani, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Banglore

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

ITA 180/NAG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)Section 80C

Taruna Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 7(2), Jpr, Jaipur

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

ITA 111/JPR/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: M/S Suhani Maharwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary, Addl.CIT
Section 115Section 115BSection 139Section 143(1)Section 3Section 80C

Parish Agarwal HUF vs. ITO Ward 1(2)(1) Meerut

Appeal is allowed as indicated above for

ITA 596/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Dishant Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 80C

Madhav Vinayak Dhadphale, Pune vs. DCIT, Pune

Appeal is partly allowed for

ITA 4/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri R.D. OmkarFor Respondent: Shri Somnath M Wajale
Section 133Section 143Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 80C

Punit Popat, Kolkata vs. Itb, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1359/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1359/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Punit Popat………………..….….…………............…...……………....Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata- 7000069. [Pan: Aflpp3320E] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi……….…….............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 29, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.10.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1 For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Passing The Order Ex Parte Without Affording Reasonable Opportunity Of Hearing. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Denying The Deduction Claimed By The Assessee Of Rs. 4,38,673/- On Account Of Interest Of Housing Loan U/S 24(B) Of The Act.

Section 10(32)Section 24Section 250Section 57Section 80C

Shyam Varandmal Rochlani, Ulhasnagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Kalyan

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

ITA 4294/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: BEFORESHRI B.R. BASKARAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Suni Mathews
Section 44ASection 80C

Jagdish Soni, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 30/JPR/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Apr 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vishnu Khandelwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 80CSection 80T

Pankaj Sharma, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 30(8), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2949/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad:Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 250Section 69ASection 80CSection 80G

Prerna Ritesh Rathi, Amravati vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 291/NAG/2023[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Apr 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80C

Jyoti Ajit Kulkarni, Pune vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 5(3), Mumbai

In the result ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed and AO is directed to give benefit on whole deposit of Rs

ITA 5067/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal- A.Y.2007-08 - A.Y.2008-09 - A.Y.2009-10 - A.Y.2010-11 - A.Y.2011-12 - A.Y.2012-13

For Appellant: Shri ChandrasekharFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair – (SR DR)

Shankar Reddy Marreddy, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9 (1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 245/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Shankar Reddy Marreddy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 16-11-16V, Ward – 9(1), R.T.A. Office Back Lane, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Telangana – 500036. Pan : Attpm6238Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Abhiroop Bhargav, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Mookambikeyan, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 03.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.04.2024

For Appellant: Shri K. Abhiroop Bhargav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Mookambikeyan, Sr.AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 69ASection 80CSection 80D

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

ITA 1447/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80C

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

ITA 1402/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80C

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

ITA 1401/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80C

Venkata Swamy Katakam, Jayashankar Bhupalpally vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Warangal

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

ITA 124/HYD/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2024

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 124/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Venkata Swamy Katakam, Income Tax Officer, Jangedu, Bhupalpally Vs. Ward-2, [Pan : Amupk5536B] Warangal अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.V. Subba Raju, DR
Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 80C

Mrs. Pravati Sahoo, Naranpur, Keonjhargarh vs. ITO, Ward Keonjhar, Keonjhar

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

ITA 13/CTK/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.13/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Pravati Sahoo, Vs Ito, Ward, Keonjhar Naranpur, Keonjhargarh-758014 Pan No. :Azwps 9710 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bivash Ranjan Panda, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 29.11.2023, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1058321138(1) For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. Shri Bivash Ranjan Panda, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Had Made Payment For Pension Policy Premium For The Earlier Years Being Ays.2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 & Had Also Claimed The Rebate U/S.80C Of The Act. The Assessee Had Surrendered The Pension Plan Policy Before Normal Date Of Maturity. Consequently, The Ao Had Treated The Entire Sum Of Rs.31,32,699/- As Income From Other Sources. It Was Further Submitted That Before The Ld. Cit(A), The Claim Was Specifically Explained But The Ld. Cit(A) Took The Stand That The Proof In Respect Of Premium Having Paid

For Appellant: Shri Bivash Ranjan Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 80C

Pravakar Samanta, Naharapur vs. ITO, Ward Jajpur, Jajpur Ward, Jajput

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

ITA 355/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.355/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Pravakar Samanta, Vs Ito, Ward Jajpur At-Naharapur, Jajpur Town-755001 Pan No. :Anaps 7558 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 30.11.2023, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1058346163(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. Shri Mohit Sheth, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That There Are Three Additions In Dispute. First, Being An Amount Of Rs.7,85,000/- Representing Sbn Notes Deposited During The Demonetisation Period In The Current Account & Od Account Of The Assessee. Secondly, The Addition Of Rs.8,45,068/- Representing The Time Deposit Of The Assessee Treating The Same As Unexplained Investment Of The Assessee. Thirdly, The Addition Of Rs.1,52,897/- Representing The Deduction Claimed U/S.80C Under Chapter Via On The Payment Made Towards Lic Premium.

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 80C

Syed Karimulla, Rajampet vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Cuddapah

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

ITA 149/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Syed Karimulla, Nandalur, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Rajampet, Ward – 1, D.No.5-98-C, C/O.Shaik Cuddapah Mastan Vali, Near Nandalur Bus Stand, Andhra Pradesh – 516510. Pan : Fddps8691Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Abhiroop Bhargav, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Yadagiri, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 07.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri Abhiroop Bhargav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri, SR.AR
Section 115Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 69ASection 80CSection 80T

Manan Jain, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-59(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 2513/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Manan Jain, Vs Ito, Plot No.12, Kh 9/8, 9/13/2, Ward -59(4), Loni Road, Jawahar Nagar, New Delhi. Delhi-110094. Pan-Bfkpj8480D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Anshul Kumar, Ca & Shri Satish Kumar, Ca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.02.2024

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68