Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Sheth Vijilal Laxmidas Tribvondas Kesar Bai Jijilal Poona Convalcent Home. v. CIT (2025) 212 ITD 205 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Wrongly applied for provisional registration under new regime-Matter remanded to the Commissioner (E) for de novo adjudication. [S.80G(5),Form No.10AB]

Subharma Charitable Trust. v. CIT (E) (2025) 212 ITD 44 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Provisionally approved-Inadvertent and clerical error-Matter remanded to Commissioner (E) to grant an opportunity to assessee to file revised application under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5). [S.80G(5)]

Dr. Vikhe Patil Foundation. v. CIT (E) (2025) 212 ITD 57 (Pune) (Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Failure to file reply to discrepancies-Matter is remanded back Commissioner (Exemption) to grant one more opportunity of hearing. [S.11, 12A, 80G(5), Form No. 10AB]

Sultankhan Educational Trust v. CIT (2025) 212 ITD 376 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Failure to furnish documents-Opportunity to be given. [S. 254(1), Form No 10AB]

Anugraha Education Trust. v. CIT (2025) 212 ITD 520 (Bang) (Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Receipt of school bus fees, tuition fees and exam fees-Registration was granted-Approval under section 80G cannot be denied. [S. 2(15),11, 12, 12A, 13]

Nanchahal Family Memorial Trust v. CIT (E) (2025) 212 ITD 372 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Issue linked with registration u/s 12A-Matter remanded.[S.12A]

Sharan Foundation v. CIT (2025) 212 ITD 463 (Amritsar)(Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Rejection of application-Non-service of notice-Matter remanded [S. 80G(5), 282]

DCIT v. Gabriel India Ltd. (2025) 212 ITD 468 (Mum)(Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Deduction of 50% of CSR expenses-Receipts produced-Claim allowed [S. 37(1)]

Shree Mahavideh Charitable Trust. v. CIT (E) (2025) 212 ITD 587 (Surat) (Trib)

S. 80G : Donation-Some objects were religious in nature-Not incurred any expenditure which was of religious nature-Mere use of words ‘religious’ or ‘religion’ in few objects of trust deed would not mean that trust was not for charitable purpose but was for religious purpose. [S.80G (5), Form No 10AB]

Braham Dev Gupta. v. JCIT (2025) 212 ITD 238 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 69C: Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Export of readymade garments-Sales not doubted-Profit margin embedded in value of such disputed purchases was to be estimated at 2.5 per cent. [S.133(6) 145]