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

Santush Pandurang Mane, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4528/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Fenil BhatFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68Section 80C

Ashok Kumar Chauhan, Shimla vs. DCIT Circle Shimla, Shimla

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

ITA 412/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: the learned CIT(A). It is noted that two appeals were filed—one in physical form and another electronically. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the first appeal on the ground of non-prosecution and subsequently dismissed the electronically filed appeal treating the same as infructuous, without adjudicating the issues on merits.5. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parveen Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 80C

Ashok Kumar Moonat, Ratlam vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-3), Indore

ITA 715/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 28Section 68Section 69BSection 80C

Tarun Kumar Paul, Siliguri vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 1, Siliguri

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

ITA 2751/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Feb 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 80CSection 80T

Adithya Vividhoddesha Sahakari Sangha Limited, Kundapura vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Udupi

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2269/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice –Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Adithya Vividhoddesha Sahakari Sanga Ltd., Post Hanglur, Kodi Road, The Income Tax Officer, Vaderhobli, Kundapura Taluk Ward-1 & Tps, Vs. (Udupi District), Udupi. Karnataka – 576 201. Pan: Aadaa4450C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R Uppin, Advocate
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 63Section 80ASection 80CSection 80P

Bhavik Shashikant Thakkar, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 27(1), Vashi Mumbai

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

ITA 5208/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarbhavik Shashikant Thakkar Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income G 601 Kukreja Palace Tax, Ward 27(1), Mumbai 4Th Floor, Tower No.6, Vashi Station Opportunity Pok, Maharashtra-400075 Complex, Vashi-400703 Pan: Acypt3095J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Adv Respondent By : Ms. Rajni Rani Roy (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/02/2026 O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (Jm): The Instant Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [For Brevity ‘The Ld. Cit(A)], Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (For Brevity ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2012-13, Date Of Order 28.11.2022. The Impugned Order Emanated From The Order Of The Ld. Acit-27(1), Mumbai (For Brevity The “Ld. Ao”), Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Date Of Order 24.03.2015 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rajni Rani Roy (CIT DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250

Rashid Hussain, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

ITA 1322/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 37(1)

Rajiv Sharma, Nehru Place vs. Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Appeal Centre

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

ITA 4356/DEL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalrajiv Sharma, Income Tax Officer, 307, Vishalbhawa, Nehru Place, Nafc, Delhi. Delhi-110019. Vs. Pan-Boaps6272K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Bhavesh Kumar, Ca Department By Shri Khitesh Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/11/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [‘Cit(A)’ In Short], Dated 09.06.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 12.03.2025 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The It Act For Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 29.09.2025 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.53,62,490/-. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Sale & Purchase Of Computer Parts, Laptop & All Other Accessories Relating To Software & Hardware. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & The Assessment Was Completed By The Ao Wherein The Total Income Of The Assessee Was Computed At Rs.1,09,08,972/- By Making Rajiv Sharma Vs. Ito Disallowance @ 5% Out Of Total Purchase Of Rs.10,42,56,278/- & Further Disallowance @10% Out Of The Expenses Claimed At Rs.15,86,675/- Was Made As The Assesses Failed To Make Compliance Before The Ao & Further Failed To File Any Details.

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80C

Ajith M Kumar, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2389/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Susan Mathew, CAFor Respondent: Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 15Section 80Section 80ASection 80C

Konatham Kotireddy, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Warangal

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1464/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: CA A VamseedharFor Respondent: MS P Sumitha, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271BSection 69A

Mukesh Kumar, Yamunaanagar vs. ITO Ward 3 Yamunanagar, Yamunanagar

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1315/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1315/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Mukesh Kumar Ito Ward 3 बनाम/ H. No. 76W No. 2, Sk Road Aaykar Bhawan, Sector 17, Vs. Radaur, Yamuna Nagar -135 133 Jagadhari, Yamuna Nagar - 135003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brups-0808-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Ajay Jain (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.01.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015- 16 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 02-09-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act On 28-03-2022. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. That The Ao Has Wrongly Invoked The Provisions Of Section 147/148 Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That The Ao Has Wrongly Taxed Enhanced Compensation Amounting To Rs. 901726 On Acquisition Of Agricultural Land Which Is Exempt Under Section 10(37) Of Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Jain (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57Section 80C

Sunil Vasantrao Chokakkar, Kolhapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Kudal

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

ITA 2982/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Pune16 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2982/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80C

Prem Lata Verma, Marris Road Aligarh vs. DCIT 4(1) (1), Aligarh

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

ITA 478/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 80C

Bharat Kumar Bansal, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1005/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1000 To 1006/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20) Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax Pan:Abfpb6416P Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) All Dated 07.03.2025 For The A.Ys. 2013- 14 To 2019-20. Since Common & Identical Issues Are Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing Of All These Appeals Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Page 1 Of 9

For Appellant: Shri A Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 153C

Bharat Kumar Bansal, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1004/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1000 To 1006/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20) Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax Pan:Abfpb6416P Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) All Dated 07.03.2025 For The A.Ys. 2013- 14 To 2019-20. Since Common & Identical Issues Are Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing Of All These Appeals Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Page 1 Of 9

For Appellant: Shri A Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 153C

Bharat Kumar Bansal, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1003/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1000 To 1006/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20) Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax Pan:Abfpb6416P Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) All Dated 07.03.2025 For The A.Ys. 2013- 14 To 2019-20. Since Common & Identical Issues Are Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing Of All These Appeals Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Page 1 Of 9

For Appellant: Shri A Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 153C

Bharat Kumar Bansal, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1002/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1000 To 1006/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20) Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax Pan:Abfpb6416P Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) All Dated 07.03.2025 For The A.Ys. 2013- 14 To 2019-20. Since Common & Identical Issues Are Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing Of All These Appeals Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Page 1 Of 9

For Appellant: Shri A Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 153C

Bharat Kumar Bansal, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1000/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1000 To 1006/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20) Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax Pan:Abfpb6416P Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) All Dated 07.03.2025 For The A.Ys. 2013- 14 To 2019-20. Since Common & Identical Issues Are Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing Of All These Appeals Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Page 1 Of 9

For Appellant: Shri A Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 153C

Sudhakar Bajirao Shisode, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

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

ITA 2780/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2780/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bhagyesh DeshmukhFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sinha
Section 144BSection 147Section 2Section 250Section 69CSection 80C

Tej Pal Singh, Reengus vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Neem Ka Thana, Neem Ka Thana

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 877/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Me That The Capital Gain Earned On This Land Acquired By Nhai Was Exempt In Terms Of Provision Section 10 Sub-Section (37) Of The Act. He Drew My Attention To The Relevant Provision Of Section 10(37) Of The Act As Under:-

For Appellant: Sh. Vedant Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary
Section 10Section 10(37)Section 250