Which cases are most cited on Section 80D?

CIT v. Surinder Pal Anand, Surinder Pal Anand (242 CTR 61) — 20 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 80D?

BharatTax indexes 123 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 80D of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 80D of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 80D of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. Surinder Pal Anand, Surinder Pal Anand (242 CTR 61) is the decision most relied on for Section 80D, cited in 20 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.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.126

Section 80D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 126 (Deduction in respect of health insurance premia) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 126 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 80D is CIT v. Surinder Pal Anand, Surinder Pal Anand (242 CTR 61), cited in 20 of the 123 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80D

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.

Judgments on Section 80D

Prashanth Paramahans Manik, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(3), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1716/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 11Section 127Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 69Section 80C

Shri Sandeep S Sharma, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 20(3)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 4801/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal a/w Ms. Neha Paranjpe, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R

Section 143(1)Section 44ASection 68

Hitesh Navinchandra Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 42(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 2280/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SMT BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Pradnya Gholap (Sr. DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 24Section 80CSection 80D

Satish Rajaji Rathod, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 19(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5404/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sucheck AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80CSection 80D

Madhuri Chinthamaneni, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 12(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 338/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR

Section 10Section 144Section 80DSection 80T

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

Lalitkumar Mohanlal Thakker, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 41(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4346/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year 2017-18 Lalitkumar Mohanlal Thakker, 1-A, Kailash Kunj, R.R.T Road, Mulund (West), Mumbai – 400 080. Pan:Abwpt-3644-G - Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Adiya RamachandranFor Respondent: Shri Suni Mathews, Sr. DR

Section 69ASection 80D

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

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

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

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

Veeramani Muthukumarasamy, Kadaladi vs. ITO, CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1110/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Aug 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1110/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Veeramani Muthukumarasamy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 2-1, Pullanthai, S. Keeranthai, Ward 1, Ramnad. Kadaladi 623 120, Tamil Nadu. [Pan:Ardpm4941N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Viswanathan, Fca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 27.10.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By One Day In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal, For Which, The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay In The Form Of An Affidavit, To Which; The Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri R. Viswanathan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80DSection 89(1)

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

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

Yeddula Harsha Vardhan Reddy, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 145/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 69ASection 80D

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)

Suajkishan Deokishan Thanvi, Silvassa vs. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer Ward2, Vapi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 145/SRT/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.145/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) Suajkishan Deokishan Income Tax Officer Thanvi, B/204, Mayuri Ward-2, Vapi (Camp At Silvassa), Vs. Apartment, Amli Road, First Floor, Vee Bee Mall, Nr. Civil Silvassa-396230 Court, Tokarkhada, Silvassa-396230 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acypj 7355 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyadev Purohit, C.A & Shri Rajendra Joshi, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-D.R

For Appellant: Shri Satyadev Purohit, C.A &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194J

Vaibhav Dipak Shah, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, Central Circle-2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 964/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Vaibhav Dipak Shah Dy. Cit, Central Circle-2(3) 9 & 10, Dadarkar Building, Mumbai Vs. 5/7 V.P. Road, C. P. Tank, Mumbai-400 004 Pan/Gir No. Aagps 2674 L (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Om Kandalkar Revenue By : Ms. Vranda U Matkari Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned

For Appellant: Shri Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U Matkari

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80D

Mrs Geeta Ravindra Patil (by Shri Ravindra Namdev Patil L/H), Thane vs. ITO, 2(1), Thane

ITA 3043/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 Mrs. Geeta Ravindra Patil Income Tax Officer, (By Shri Ravindra Namdev Ward 2(1), Patil L/H), Thane – 401 105 Room No.01, Vs. Ground Floor, Patil Niwas Building, Bhayander (East), Thane - 401105 Pan: Aslpp2424L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Paras Jain, A.R. Revenue By : Shri A.N. Bhalekar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 25 . 01 . 2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28 . 02 . 2023

For Appellant: Shri Paras Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A.N. Bhalekar, D.R

Section 147Section 80CSection 80D