Section 80G of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.133

Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 133 (Deduction in respect of donations to certain funds, charitable institutions, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 133 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 80G is Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT (101 ITR 234), cited in 323 of the 6,482 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80G

Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT
101 ITR 234 · 1975 · Supreme Court
323
citing judgments

This case defines 'education' under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act as systematic instruction, schooling, or training given to the young for preparation for the work of life. It clarifies that 'education' in this context has a narrow meaning, not extending to every acquisition of further knowledge.

CIT v. Nirav Modi
390 ITR 292 · 2017 · High Court
286
citing judgments

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) cannot invoke revisionary powers under Section 263 merely on the ground of "inadequate enquiry" by the Assessing Officer (AO) if the AO has conducted an enquiry, examined evidence, and formed a possible view. For Section 263 to apply, the PCIT must demonstrate that the assessment order is both erroneous (contrary to law) and prejudicial to the revenue.

Vedabhai v. Santaram
253 ITR 798 · 2002 · Supreme Court
262
citing judgments

When substantial justice and technical considerations are in conflict, substantial justice should be prioritized. Condoning delay requires a cautious approach without malafide or dilatory tactics, and 'sufficient cause' should be interpreted liberally to advance substantial justice.

India Trade Promotion Organization v. DGIT(Exemption)
371 ITR 333 · 2015 · High Court
128
citing judgments

An institution engaged in the advancement of general public utility retains its charitable character and eligibility for exemptions under Section 11 or approval under Section 10(23C)(iv) provided profit is not its predominant motive, even if it generates incidental surpluses or collects fees.

Ananda Social and Educational Trust v. CIT
426 ITR 340 · 2020 · Supreme Court
116
citing judgments

For registration under Section 12AA, the Commissioner (Exemptions) must examine the objects of the trust and the genuineness of its proposed activities, even if the trust has not yet commenced actual charitable activities or incurred expenditure.

CIT v. ITC Ltd.
236 Taxmann 612 · 2016 · High Court
108
citing judgments

When computing deduction under Section 80IA, specifically for inter-unit transfer of power, the benefit cannot be claimed based on rates chargeable by distribution licensees to consumers. The deduction must be computed based on the rate fixed by the Tariff Regulation Commission for sale by electricity generating companies.

Dhanuka & Sons. v. CIT
339 ITR 319 · 2011 · High Court
100
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A for expenditure incurred to earn exempt dividend income (under Section 10(34)) is permissible. The assessee bears the burden to show the source of funds for acquiring shares, regardless of whether those shares are old or recently acquired.

Velu Palandar v. DCIT
83 ITR 683 · 1972 · High Court
94
citing judgments

The opportunity of hearing provided to an assessee must be real, effective, and realistic, not merely notional, and tax authorities are incumbent to decide cases on their merits after affording due opportunity.

CIT v. Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd.
372 ITR 303 · 2015 · High Court
93
citing judgments

An assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue merely because it does not explicitly discuss an issue for which the Assessing Officer had raised queries and the assessee had provided a response. In such a scenario, the Principal Commissioner cannot invoke revisionary powers under Section 263.

JMS Mining (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT
130 Taxmann.com 118 · 2021 · ITAT
93
citing judgments

Donations made as part of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenditure are eligible for deduction under Section 80G if all conditions of Section 80G are satisfied. Such expenses are not automatically disallowed merely because they are CSR expenditure, in the absence of specific amendments to Section 80G similar to those in Section 37(1).

Judgments on Section 80G

Britannia Industries Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 461/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 461/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Britannia Industries Ltd. Dy. Cit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata 5/1A, Hungerford Street Vs Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata - 700017 [Pan: Aabcb2066P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kush Kanodia, A/R Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/10/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 24/03/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Appellant Had Suo Moto Computed & Disallowed Sum Of Rs.14,10,610/- Which Inter Alia Included Sum Of Rs.14,19,009/- Computed In Terms Of Rule 8D(2)(Ii) Being 1% Of The Value Of Tax Free Investments & Therefore The Ao Had Factually Erred In Holding That The Aforesaid Voluntary Disallowance Represented Disallowance Offered By Way Of Direct Expenditure U/S 14A Read With Rule 8D(2)(I) & Thereby Wrongly Computed Further Disallowance Of Rs.13,32,000/- In Terms Of Rule 8D(2)(Ii).

For Appellant: Shri Kush Kanodia, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, D/R
Section 115Section 14ASection 250Section 35Section 45Section 80G

Thirumurugan Kalvi Arakkattalai, Chennai vs. Shri. Ravi Ramachandran Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai

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

ITA 662/CHNY/2023[-----]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2023

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.662/Chny/2023 Thirumurugan Kalvi Arakkattalai, Vs. The Commissioner Of Income 8/507, G.N. Garden, Neruperichal, Tax (Exemption), Aayakar Bhawan – Pooluvapatti 641 602. Annexe Building, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, [Pan:Aabtt7977L] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Manjunatha, G.: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai, Dated 30.03.2023. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed An Online Application On 29.09.2022 In Form No. 10Ab Under Section 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Seeking Approval Under Section 80G Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(E) Rejected The Application Filed By The Assessee In Form No. 10Ab On The Ground That The Assessee Has 2

For Appellant: Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri NIlay Baran Som, CIT
Section 10Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)