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

Rajendra Kumar Agrawal, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 130/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.130/Rpr/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rajendra Kumar Agrawal Vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Gandhi Chowk Tax, Raipur-1 Neora, Raipur (C.G.) 493114 Pan No. Acipa 5919L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारितीती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Praveen Goyel, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई ाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/08/2023 घोषणाणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24 /08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Dated 16.03.2023 U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “ 1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Passed By Id. Pr. Cit-1, Raipur U'S 263 Of The Act Dated 16/03/2023 Is Illegal & Void- Ab-Initio, 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit-1. Raipur Failed To Demonstrate That How The Order Passed By The Ao Is Erroneous Which Caused Prejudice To The Revenue. 3. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit-1. Raipur Has Stated In The Order That No Adverse Inference Is Drawn On The Issues Raised In Notice U/S 263, However, Set Aside The Proceedings Initiated U/S 263 Of The Act, Hence, The Same Is Contradictory & Incorrect. 4. The Appellant Craves To Add, Alter Or Delete Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal During The Course Of Appellate Proceedings,”

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Goyel, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 194Section 194JSection 263Section 40Section 438Section 80C

Swapna Katakam, Amberpet vs. ITO., Ward-4(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 361/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Anubham, DR

Section 80C

Ajoy Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Durgapur

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 345/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.344&345/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Ajoy Kumar Ghosh........................................................................……Appellant C/O Jain Vinod K & Associates, 41A, Ajc Bose Road, Suite No.613, 6Th Floor, Kolkata-700017. [Pan: Adgpg6463Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(2), Durgapur............................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vinod Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 24, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 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 Both Dated 01.02.2023 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’). Since Facts & Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Identical, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.344/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts.

Section 147Section 250Section 80CSection 80T

Ajoy Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Durgapur

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 344/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Section 147Section 250Section 80CSection 80T

Rajesh Prajapati, Ujjain vs. ACIT Circle 2(1), Ujjain

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 167/IND/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2013-14 Shri Rajesh Prajapati, A.C.I.T., बनाम/ 15, Naliya Bakhal, Circle 2(1), Ujjain Ujjain Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Alnpp5190Q Assessee By Ms.Sonam Khandelwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2023

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80CSection 80DSection 80G

Giriraj Prasad Goyal, Tonk vs. ITO Tonk, Tonk

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 200/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 24

Anil Gupta, Jaipur vs. I.T.O. Ward 6(1), Jaipur, Rajasthan

ITA 12/JPR/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Sh. G. M. Mehta (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 23(4)(b)Section 80C

Sandeep Jain, Jaipur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(4) Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 20/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a

Section 143(3)Section 80C

Ghan Shyam Dass, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-41(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 799/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

Section 80Section 80C

Sk. Saiful Ali, Haldia vs. I.T.O., Ward - 27(1), Haldia

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

ITA 150/KOL/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 150/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Sk. Saiful Ali,.........................................Appellant Raj Stile, Khajanchak, Durgachak, Haldia, Purba Medinipur-721602 [Pan: Akipa2468E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-27(1), Haldia, Durgachak, Haldia, Purna Medinipur-721602 Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhry, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 13, 2023 O R D E R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 80C

Om Prakash Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 9 Now Known As CC-18, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 1591/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita Nos. 1591 & 1590/Del/2018 (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2006-07) Om Prakash Kukreja Vs. Acit Bgjc & Associates Llp, Central Circle – 9 Raj Tower, G-1, Alakhnanda, New Delhi Community Centre, New Delhi - 110 065 Pan No. Aakpk 8092 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Painuly, Ca Revenue By Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.06.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 31.05.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2006-07 & 2012-13. 2. Before Us, At The Outset, Both The Parties Submitted That Though The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are For Two Different Assessment Years But The Facts & Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Identical Except For The Assessment Year & The

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 69Section 69ASection 80C

Om Prakash Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 9 Now Known As CC-18, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 1590/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2006-07

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 69Section 69ASection 80C

Suraj Dinesh Singhal, Mumbai vs. ITO-20(3)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 7483/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesuraj Dinesh Singhal Vs. Ito – 20(3)(3) B-601/602, Green 4Th Floor, Piramal Acres, Lokhandwala Chambers, Lalbaug, Complex, Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400013. Mumbai – 400053. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aowps3343E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Siddharth Shriovastav.Ar Respondent By : Mr. S.G.Mehta.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 53, Mumbai Order Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal

For Appellant: Mr.Siddharth Shriovastav.ARFor Respondent: Mr. S.G.Mehta.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 69ASection 80C

ACIT, Central Circle-3, Patna vs. Rishav Dutta, Patna

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

ITA 51/PAT/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri M. Kr. Mashi, CA

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 80C

Late Sh. Shekhar Dhariwal Through L/H Smt. Nikita Dhariwal, Dhariwal Bhawan, Shastri Market, Kota vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Kota

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 51/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl.CIT

Section 147Section 148

Sh. Ghulam Nabi Marazi, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(5), Baramulla

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 190/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80Section 80C

Sri. Sanjay Ramprakash Saxena, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 176/BANG/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri. Sanjay Ramprakash Saxena, Dcit, G1, Smr Devmuk Cpc, Sy. No.97/104, 9Th Main, Vs. Bengaluru. Bannerghatta Road, Vijaya Bank Layout, Bengaluru – 560 076. Pan : Aozps 7209 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Bharath Shetty, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel. Date Of Hearing : 17.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Bharath Shetty, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 10Section 10(13)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 17(2)Section 250Section 80CSection 80D

Gonuguntla Nirmala Devi, Annatapur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Anantapur

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

ITA 413/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Smt. Gonuguntla Nirmala Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Devi, Anantapur Circle 1 Pan:Aipbd2345Q Anantapur (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri R. Venkata Ramana, Ca Revenue By: Shri M. Naveen Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/04/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 2.08.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2016-17. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Partner In M/S. Nithin Sai Construction. He Is Also A Director In M/S. Nithin Sai Agrotech (P) Ltd . The Assessee Filed Her Return Of Income Declaring Total Income At Rs.23,89,810/- Admitting Income From House Property, Business Income & From Other Sources. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) & Subsequently

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Ramana, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen Kumar, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(22)(e)Section 80C

Rajesh Gupta, Kota vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 446/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Jain (CA)For Respondent: Smt Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

Manju Lata Sultania, Bilaspur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

ITA 92/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 92/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Manju Lata Sultania 1-1, Venkat Nagar Marg, Pendra Road, Bilaspur-495 117 (C.G.) Pan : Agjpg1178Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)