Which cases are most cited on Section 80C?

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Delco India Pvt. Ltd. (67 Taxmann.com 357) — 42 citing judgments; Ramco Cements Ltd. v. DCIT (373 ITR 146) — 28 citing judgments; CIT v. Surinder Pal Anand, Surinder Pal Anand (242 CTR 61) — 20 citing judgments; Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mamta Agarwal (171 Taxmann.com 54) — 10 citing judgments; Mrs. Meera Jacob v. ITO (313 ITR 411) — 6 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 80C?

BharatTax indexes 658 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 80C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

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

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

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

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

citing judgments

Mrs. Meera Jacob v. ITO

313 ITR 411 · 2009 · High Court

citing judgments

401 ITR 215. (b) Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai v. Janak Shantilal Mehta

124 Taxmann.com 516 · 2021 · High Court

citing judgments

V.M. Salgaonkar & Brother (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

281 CTR 191 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 80C

Luv Jit Jalan, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 103/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18 Luv Jit Jalan No.28 & 29, Ground Floor Arihant Plaza, Kamaraj Road Ito Vs. Bangalore 560 042 Ward-1(2)(3) Karnataka Bangalore Pan No.Ailpj5661P Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prashanth G.S., A.R. Revenue By : Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth G.S., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue

Section 115BSection 250Section 69Section 69ASection 80C

Naga Vara Prasad Mandala, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 599/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blenaga Vara Prasad Mandala V. Acit – Central Circle – 1(1) Flat No.301 Aayakar Bhavan Kranthi Venkateswara Apartments Opp. Lb Stadium, Basheer Bagh Telangana - 500004 East Marredpalli, Telangana - 500026 Pan: Dnrpm7537R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : None Department Represented By : Shri Shakeer Ahamed

Section 115BSection 69ASection 80C

Magaram Ghosh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Durgapur

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

ITA 605/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.605/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Magaram Ghosh……………..…..…......................…...……………....Appellant C/O. Jain Vinod K & Associates, 41A, Ajc Bose Road, Suite No.513, 6Th Floor, Kolkata-700017. [Pan: Aczpg5705H] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(2), Durgapur.......…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vinod Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Bibekananda Madhu, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 29, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 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 25.03.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee Is An Employee Of Durgapur Steel Plant At Durgapur. The Only Issue Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Is Relating To Non- Grant Of Statutory Deduction U/S 80C Of Rs.1,50,000/- & Of Professional Tax Of Rs.2400/- While Computing The Income Of The Assessee. 3. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee, In This Respect, Has Relied Upon Form 16 Issued By The Employer, Wherein, It Has Been Shown That The

Section 250Section 80C

Shankaraiah Telakapally, Nalgonda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Nalgonda

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

ITA 655/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Shankaraiah Telakapalli, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 4-10-520/Cs/1, Sainagar Ward – 1, Colony, Ward-24, Nalgonda. Nalgonda, Telangana - 508001. Pan : Alipt1315Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Phanindra, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri T. Venkanna, Sr.A.R. Date Of Hearing: 18/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/01/2024

For Appellant: Shri S. Phanindra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Venkanna, Sr.A.R

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 24Section 69ASection 80CSection 80ESection 80G

Neetu Nayyar, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2335/DEL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 254

Sri. Bevahalli Gangappa Ramakrishnappa, Kolar vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 732/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nishal B., D.R

Section 115BSection 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

Raj Kumar Arora, Faridabad vs. DCIT Circle-1, Faridabad

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

ITA 1747/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. N. K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2012-13 Raj Kumar Arora, Vs. Dcit C/O Rra Taxindia D-28, Circle- 1 South Extension, Pat-1, Faridabad New Delhi-110049 Pan No.Adrpa1243R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Sh. Somil Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/12/2023 Order

Section 145Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 80CSection 80G

Mukhtar Ramzan Shaikh, Vapi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6, Vapi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 629/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.628 & 629/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Physical Hearing) Mukhtar Ramzan Shaikh Income Tax Officer, 303, Imran Mension, Opp. Vs. Ward-6, Vapi, Income Tax Office, Suman Auto, Godal Nagar, Room No.808, Fortune Saquare- Vapi-396191 Ii, Daman Road, Chala Vapi- 396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Awlps 0991 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69ASection 80C

Mukhtar Ramzan Shaikh, Vapi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6, Vapi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 628/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69ASection 80C

Poonam Mohta, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Cir 1(1), Kolkata

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

ITSSA 156/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma] It(Ss)A No. 156/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Poonam Mohta Vs Acit, Central Circle-1(1), . Kolkata Pan: Aezpm 1243 A Appellant Respondent Date Of Hearing 21.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29.11.2023 For The Assessee Shri P.K. Sanghai, Ar For The Revenue Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit Order Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short ‘A.Y.’) 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-20, Kolkata Dated 31.07.2023 Which Is Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(In Short ‘The Act’) Dated 30.12.2016. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2Section 250Section 80Section 80DSection 80T

Vishnumpet Sundaresan Venkatesh, Bengaluru vs. Assessing Officer, ACIT Circle

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

ITA 516/BANG/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2007-08 Shri. Vishnumpet Sundaresan Venkatesh, Vs. Acit, 42, Prestige Woodside, Circle – 6(1), Off Doddaballapur Main Road, Bengaluru. Avalahalli, Bengaluru – 560 037. Pan : Aajpv 5556 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Venkatesh Sundaresan, Assessee Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.11.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Venkatesh Sundaresan, AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue

Section 139(5)Section 154Section 250Section 80C

Mr. Bhaskar Balu Bhise, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC, Incometax Drpartment, Delhi

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

ITA 2752/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalebhaskar Balu Bhise, Vs Nfac, B-17, Triveni Raja Yayati Delhi-110001. Chs Ltd, Sector – 15, Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400703 Pan/Gir No. : Abjpb8861A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Sushant.N.Alme.ARFor Respondent: Shri. S.G.Menon. Sr.DR

Section 80CSection 80G

Sanjit Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Durgapur

In the result, both the appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 417/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.416&417/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Sanjit Kumar Ghosh…...……….....................................……………....Appellant C/O Jain Vinod K & Associates, 41A, Ajc Bose Road, Suite No.613, 6Th Floor, Kolkata-700017. [Pan: Adhpg7981J] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(2), Durgapur.......…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vinod Jain, Ar, Appeared On 15.06.2023 & None Appeared On 03.11.2023 On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanjiv Kumar Paul, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On 15.06.2023 & Shri B. K. Singh, Jcit – Sr. Dr, Appeared On 03.11.2023 On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 15, 2023 & November 03, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 10, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 26.11.2021 & 28.04.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively.

Section 250Section 80CSection 80T

Sanjit Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Durgapur

In the result, both the appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 416/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Section 250Section 80CSection 80T

Badri Narayan Darak, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 475/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Phanindra, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. Naveen Kumar, DR

Section 44ASection 80C

Kartar Singh Chouhan, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-62(5), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 7209/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hearing & During Course Of Hearing.”

Section 80C

ITO Ward - 54(5), New Delhi vs. Roshan Lal Sharma, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 are dismissed

ITA 5150/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ratnesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 80C

ITO Ward - 54(5), New Delhi vs. Roshan Lal Sharma, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 are dismissed

ITA 5149/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ratnesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 80C

Narayan Singh Nayak, Jhabua vs. The ITO 2, Ratlam

ITA 42/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Narayan Singh Nayak, Ito-2, बनाम/ 1, Ranu Colony, Ratlam Jhabua Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Abapn9853D Assessee By Shri Santosh Deshmukh & Shri Parth Jhavar, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 04.09.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 263

Ram Niwas Verma, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Jaipur

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

ITA 335/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajni Kant Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 147Section 250Section 50CSection 80C