Section 80GGC of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.137

Section 80GGC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 137 (Deduction in respect of contributions given by any person to political parties) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 137 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 80GGC is 282(Del) 3. Pee Aar Securities Ltd. v. DCIT (97 Taxmann.com 398), cited in 40 of the 195 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80GGC

282(Del) 3. Pee Aar Securities Ltd. v. DCIT
97 Taxmann.com 398 · 2018 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

The genuineness of transactions, particularly the creditworthiness of creditors for share capital, is a key factor in the addition under section 68. The assessee must provide sufficient evidence to prove the genuineness of such transactions.

171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi v. CIT
298 ITR 1 · 2008 · Supreme Court
14
citing judgments

The revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 cannot be exercised against an order that has merged into an appellate order, particularly after a declaration has been finalized under a scheme like the VSVS Scheme, 2024, crystallizing the assessee's liability.

Pavankumar M Sanghvi v. ITO
258 Taxmann 160 · 2018 · Supreme Court
11
citing judgments
CIT v. Prakash Industries Ltd.
322 ITR 622 · High Court
9
citing judgments
Satish Kumar Lakhmani v. Pr.CIT
112 Taxmann.com 118 · 2019 · Reported
8
citing judgments
(i) CIT v. Cosmopolitan Trading Corporation
274 ITR 640 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Dwarkadhish Buildwell Private Limited v. CIT
109 Taxmann.com 5 · High Court
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 80GGC

Gobind Daya Singh Marwaha, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 449/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

For Appellant: Shri Manish J Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saresa Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 80G

Amit Pahuja, Indore vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Thane

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

ITA 868/MUM/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeamit Pahuja Vs Dcit, Circle-1, Thane 6 Roopam Nagar, Near Manik Office Of Dcit, Ashar It Park, 6Th Bagh Over Bridge, Indore, Floor, Road No.16Z, Wagle Madhya Pradesh-452013 Industrial Estate, Thane-400604 Pan: Atspp4469M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Jaideep Jain Adv. & Shri Ashish Goyal Adv. (Virtually Appeared) Revenue By : Shri Mukesh Thakwani (Sr.Dr) Date Of Hearing : 17/06/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2026 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 2019-20, Date Of Order 16.01.2026. The Impugned Order Emanated From The Order Of The Assessment Unit Income Tax Department (For Brevity The ‘Ld. Ao’) Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Date Of Order 13.01.2025. 2 Amit Pahuja 2. The Assessee Has Taken The Additional Grounds Which Are As Below: “The Following May Kindly Be Admitted As Additional Grounds: - 3. That, The Proceeding Initiated By Ld.Ao U/S 148 Are Illegal, Invalid, Without Jurisdiction, Void-Ab-Initio, Non Est, Barred By Limitation. 4. That, The Reopening Of Assessment Beyond Three Years Is Bad In Law, As The Conditions Prescribed Under Section 149(1)(B) Have Not Been Satisfied. 5. That, The Approval Was Taken From Pr. Cit Instead Of Pr. Ccit/Ccit As Mandated Under Section 151 In Case Notice U/S 148 Issued Beyond 3 Years.”

For Appellant: Shri Jaideep Jain Adv. & Shri Ashish Goyal Adv. (Virtually appeared)For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Thakwani (Sr.DR)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 250Section 80G

Sunil Nagindas Soni, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

ITA 2102/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jun 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Hem ChhajedFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit
Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 149Section 69ASection 80G

Sarika Ravka, Mumbai vs. ITO, Mumbai

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

ITA 2507/MUM/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Manish Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 80G

Nikunj Ajitkumar Jani, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 487/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleincome Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(2), Mr. Nikunj Ajitkumar Jani, A 301, Ganesh Skyline, Income Tax Office, Behind Sayona Tilak 3 Vejalpur, Vs. Nirnaynagar S.O., Gujarat Ahmedabad City, Gujarat Pan: Ahtpj6113F (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chintan Thakker, Ar : Shri Saresa Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing : 16.04.2026 : 19.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per : Suchitra Kamble, J M: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short “Cit(A)”] Dated 26.12.2025 For The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Assessing Officer Erred In Law & On Facts In Completing The Reassessment U/S 147 R.W.S 144B, Which Is Bad In Law, Without Valid Assumption Of Jurisdiction & Hence Liable To Be Quashed. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer Erred In Disallowing The Deduction Of ₹1,00,000/- Claimed Under Section 80Ggc, Despite The Appellant Having Fulfilled All Statutory Conditions Prescribed Under The Act. 3. The Learned Assessing Officer Erred In Law In Treating The Donation As Bogus Without Bringing On Record Any Incriminating Material Or Evidence To Prove That The Donation Amount Was Returned To The Appellant, Either In Cash Or In Any Other Manner. Mr. Nikunj Ajitkumar Jani

For Appellant: Shri Chintan Thakker, AR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 13ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 29CSection 80G

Sureshkumar Prahladbhai Patel, Gujarat vs. ITO Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad, Gujarat

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 411/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Chirag Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Girish Parihar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 80G

Ashish Kamleshkumar Shah, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2493/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamblemr. Ashish Kamleshkumar Shah, Huf, Income Tax Officer, 2, Kaladham Appt., Ward 3(3)(2), Haridas Park, Vejalpur, Vs. Ahmedabad Nehrunagar, Satellite, Gujarat Ahmedabad Gujarat Pan: Aacha1755Q (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Kaushani Shah, Ar : Shri Girish Parihar, Sr. Dr Respondent By : 01.04.2026 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 17.06.2026 O R D E R Per : Suchitra Kamble, J M: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 15.10.2025 For The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That The Reassessment Proceedings Are Not Tenable In Law & Therefore Additions Made Be Deleted. 2. That The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Upholding Donation Of Rs. 8,00,000/-Made By The Appellant To Political Party As Non Genuine & Thereby Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer Of Rs.8,00,000/-. 2. That The Various Reason Advance By Leaned Cit(A) In Considering Donation Of Rs.8,00,000/- As Non Genuine Are Contrary To The Facts Of The Case & The Evidence On 3. That Appellant Respectfully Submit That It Has Discharged Primary Onus Casted On It To Prove The Genuineness Of The Donation Made By It. Assessing Officer Has Relied On General Statement Of Representative Of Political Party Which Does Not Contain Specific Information About Genuineness Of The Donation Made By The Appellant. 4. The Appellant Therefore Submits That Claim Of Donation Made By It For Rs. 8,00,000/- To Political Party Be Allowed To It.”

For Appellant: Ms. Kaushani Shah, ARFor Respondent: 01.04.2026
Section 148Section 148ASection 80G

Manoj Jayram Sarang, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

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

ITA 2531/MUM/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee () Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Mara, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Thakwani (SR DR)

Prashant Prafulrai Pandya, Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Jamnagar

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

ITA 238/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 238/Rjt/2026 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2019-20) Prashant Prafulrai Pandya The Assistant Commissioner Of A-112, Mayfair Towers, 132 Ft Ring Vs. Income Tax Office, Circle-1 Road, Nr. D-Mart Satellite, Aayakar Bhavan, Manek Centre, P N Ahmedabad-380015 Marg, Jamnagar-361008 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acwpp4080F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 274Section 80G

Mahesh Upendra Majithia, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Circle 2 1 1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 620/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri. T.R. Senthil Kumarmahesh Upendra Majithia, Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 92, Shaligram 2, Prahladnagar, Income Tax, Anandnagar Road, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380015. Ahmedabad. [Pan:Aftpm 3502 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sunil Maloo, A.R. Respondent By: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.06.2026

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Maloo, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, SR-DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 250Section 282ASection 80G

Mahesh Upendra Majithia, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Circle 2 1 1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 620/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri. T.R. Senthil Kumarmahesh Upendra Majithia, Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 92, Shaligram 2, Prahladnagar, Income Tax, Anandnagar Road, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380015. Ahmedabad. [Pan:Aftpm 3502 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sunil Maloo, A.R. Respondent By: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.06.2026

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Maloo, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, SR-DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 250Section 282ASection 80G

Arun Pratap Singh, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 1134/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyarun Pratap Singh, Vs. Ito, B2-112, Sobha City, Office Of Ito, Del-C(56)(1) Sector-108, New Delhi Gurgaon-122017 Haryana (Pan: Bgwps8938J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant/Assessee By: In Person Respondent/Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr (Through Vc) Date Of Hearing : 23.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.06.2026 Order

For Appellant: In PersonFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR (Through VC)
Section 115BSection 132Section 69CSection 80G

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad vs. Parashar Developers, Ahmedabad

ITA 1045/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jun 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Section 132Section 250Section 68

Dipesh Narendrakumar Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 3(2)(6), Surat

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1379/SRT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Jun 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Upadhyay, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 270ASection 270A(9)Section 274Section 80G

Shri Omprakash Singh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 42(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 9326/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pawan Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 270ASection 270A(1)Section 270A(9)Section 80G

Mukesh Somani, Bhilwara vs. Assessing Officer, ITO, WD-1, Bhl

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1140/JODH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blemukesh Somani Assessing Officer Somani Mention, Near Bhilwara Bharhmani Sweet Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara- 311001 Pan No. Aeaps 8696G Assessee By Shri Akhil Kakhani, Ca & Deepak Taparia, Ca (Physical) Smt. Seema Meena, Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 19 / 05 / 2026 Date Of Pronouncement 02 / 06 / 2026 Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal By Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As Nfac/ Cit(A)] Dated 05.09.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2019-20 Challenging Therein Confirmation Of The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,00,000/- U/S 80Ggc In Respect Of Donation To Rashtriya Samajwadi Party (Secular).

Section 147Section 80G

Amol Suresh Sinkar, Pune vs. ITO Ward 1(2) Jalgaon, Jalgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3146/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20 Amol Suresh Sinkar Ito, Ward-1(2), Jalgaon 502, Celesta Neo Co-Op Hsng. Soc. Ltd. Vs. Gat No.186, Spine Road, Kundalwadi, Dist. Pune – 412114 Pan: Atkps4796A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vinay Kawadia (Virtually) Department By : Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. Cit (Virtually) Date Of Hearing : 16-04-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 26-05-2026 O R D E R Per Astha Chandra, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kawadia (virtually)For Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(9)Section 80G

Nagaji Ambabhai Vekariya, Pune vs. ITO Ward 13(4), Pune

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

ITA 441/PUN/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.441/Pun/2026 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Nagaji Ambabhai Vekariya, Ito, Ward-13(4), Flat No. 303, Maltikunj Apartment, Pune Near Ratan Park, Sus Road, Vs. Pashan, Pune-411021 Pan : Achpv7751N अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan Department By : Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain Date Of Hearing : 18-05-2026 Date Of 25-05-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.11.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2019-20. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac In Confirming The Penalty Of Rs.3,12,000/- Levied By The Ld. Assessing Officer (“Ao”) U/S 270A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For Under-Reporting Of Income Due To Misreporting.

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain
Section 147Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 80G

Amit Sharma, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Madhya Pradsh

In the result, legal ground raised by the assessee before me is allowed

ITA 593/AGR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 May 2026AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 80G

Govindbhai Nanjibhai Chaudhari, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 5(3)(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2440/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Chirag Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Girish Parihar, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80G