Approval u/s 80G for new cases to be effective from year in which application is made 

Approval u/s 80G for new cases to be effective from previous year in which application is made  

MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Revenue)
(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES)

Notification No. 34/2023

New Delhi, 30th May, 2023

INCOME-TAX

G.S.R.399(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G and the third proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G read with section 295 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Income-tax Rules, 1962, namely:-

1. Short title and commencement. ̶̶ (1) These rules may be called the Income-tax (7th Amendment) Rules, 2023.

(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

2. In the Income-tax Rules, 1962, in rule 11AA, for sub-rule (7), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely:-

“(7)  In case of an application made under clause (iv) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act, the provisional approval shall be effective from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which such application is made.”

[F. No. 370142/13/2023-TPL]

VIPUL AGARWAL, Director (Tax Policy and Legislation)

Note: The principal rules were published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, Section-3, Sub-section (ii) vide number S.O. 969(E) dated 26^th March,1962 and were last amended vide notification number G.S.R. 396 (E) dated 29^th May, 2023.

• In absence of mala fide intention bank should not be treated as assessee in default
• Whether bank account was fraudulently open in the name of assessee is question of fact
• SBI Concurrent Auditor Empanelment of Chartered Accountant Firms 2024-25. Last date 18.05.2024
• Change in the constitution of Appellate Authority for CAs CSs and Cost Accountants
• Trade Tax refund withheld beyond stipulated period & adjusted from demand unjustified – SC