Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Foundation for Friendly Environment & Medical Awareness. v. CIT (E) (2025) 215 ITD 410 (Chennai) (Trib.)

S. 80G: Donation-Delay in filing application-Order of CIT(E) rejection of application was set aside and directed to treat application as having been filed under clause (iv)(B) of first proviso to section 80G(5)[S. 80G(5)(iv)(B)]

Sthanakvasi Jain Sangh Jivrajpark v. CIT (2025) 215 ITD 213 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 80G: Donation-Rejection of application on the ground that the objects were religious and it had expended more than 5 per cent of its income on religious activities without considering the assessee’s explanation of the assessee-Matter was remanded to the file of CIT E) for fresh examination of submission and grant approval if found eligible. [S.80G(5), 80G(5B)]

Radhe Krushna Gau Sala Trust v. CIT(E) (2025) 215 ITD 32 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 80G: Donation-Mentioning wrong code-Rectified by filing another Form 10AB-Rejection application by CIT E) was set aside. [S.80G(5), Form No 10AB]

Prayatna Charitable Trust. v. CIT(E) (2025) 215 ITD 26 (Ahd.) (Trib.)

S. 80G : Donation-Knowledge based spiritual programs-Promote high moral values and not rituals or religious practices-Rejection of application by CIT E) was set aside for re-examination. [S.80G(5)(iii)]

Ankur Fine Products. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 633 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 69C: Unexplained expenditure-Purchases-Mismatch between purchases in VAT returns and audited accounts-The difference was due to statutory compliance-Addition was deleted.

Lakhvir Kaur. v. DCIT (2025) 215 ITD 39 (Chd) (Trib.)

S. 69C: Unexplained expenditure-Foreign travelling expenditure of daughter-borne by husband-Personal use of vehicle-Addition was deleted. [S. 132]

Chinthalapudi Ramakrishna. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 222 (Hyd) (Trib.)

S. 69A: Unexplained money-Cash deposits-Additional evidence-Matter remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication. [S. 147]

Renu Vinod Kaushal. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 12 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 69A: Unexplained money-Cash deposits-Past disclosures and withdrawals-Addition was sustained to the extent of Rs 10 lakhs.[S.44AE]

Renu Vinod Kaushal. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 12 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 69: Unexplained investment-Bonds/Debenture-Investment was made from her daughter’s bank account, where she was a nominee-Addition was deleted.

Lakhvir Kaur. v. DCIT (2025) 215 ITD 39 (Chd) (Trib.)

S. 69 :Unexplained investments-Jewellery-Jewellery bills found during search were not substantial-Poultry Farm Sale-Photocopy of an agreement to sell, allegedly retrieved from WhatsApp chat-Statement of buyer was not recorded-Additions on account were unjustified.[S. 131(IA), 132]