Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. v. ITO (

95 ITD 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#8589 most cited

What is Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. v. ITO ( authority for?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) confirmed a decision regarding the eligibility for deduction under Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court formulated a question of law concerning whether the assessee fulfilled the conditions for this deduction.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. v. ITO · 95 ITD 1 · Section 80-IA · deduction · industrial undertaking · ITAT · High Court · question of law

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 136Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147

Judgments citing Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. v. ITO (

Ashiana Buildprop Private Limited, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

ITA 706/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…Ashiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR. BEFORE: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2016-17 Ashiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., 17, Naya Marg Court Circle, Udaipur. PAN No. AAHCA7939G Appellant Vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Udaipur. Respondent Appellant by Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Adv. Respondent by Shri Lovish Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 26/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement 26 /05/2025 ORDER PER DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. These are four appeals filed by the…

Thed CIT, Central-1, Bhopal vs. M/S Dilip Buildcon Ltd, Bhopal

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 290/IND/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…(P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898 / Bang / 2009). M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others b. CIT v/s PNC Construction Co Ltd (2015) 55 taxmann.com 21 (Allahabad) c. Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (79 ITD 213) d. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (95 ITD 1) e. Transitory (India) Ltd v/s ITO, ward 2(2), Guntur (2011) 134 ITD 269 19. Further, CIT (A) has distinguished the decision relied upon by the AO in para 10.1 and 10.2 of the appellate order and has held that the same are not applicable to the facts of the appellant’s case. Here, it is important to note that decision rendered in the case of Katira…

Shri Dilip Buildcon Ltd, Bhopal vs. DCIT Central -1, Bhopal

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 197/IND/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…(P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898 / Bang / 2009). M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others b. CIT v/s PNC Construction Co Ltd (2015) 55 taxmann.com 21 (Allahabad) c. Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (79 ITD 213) d. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (95 ITD 1) e. Transitory (India) Ltd v/s ITO, ward 2(2), Guntur (2011) 134 ITD 269 19. Further, CIT (A) has distinguished the decision relied upon by the AO in para 10.1 and 10.2 of the appellate order and has held that the same are not applicable to the facts of the appellant’s case. Here, it is important to note that decision rendered in the case of Katira…

DCIT (Central)-1, Bhopal vs. Dilip Buildcon Ltd., Bhopal

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 882/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…(P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898 / Bang / 2009). M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others b. CIT v/s PNC Construction Co Ltd (2015) 55 taxmann.com 21 (Allahabad) c. Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (79 ITD 213) d. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (95 ITD 1) e. Transitory (India) Ltd v/s ITO, ward 2(2), Guntur (2011) 134 ITD 269 19. Further, CIT (A) has distinguished the decision relied upon by the AO in para 10.1 and 10.2 of the appellate order and has held that the same are not applicable to the facts of the appellant’s case. Here, it is important to note that decision rendered in the case of Katira…

DCIT (Central)-1, Bhopal vs. Dilip Buildcon Ltd., Bhopal

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 881/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…(P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898 / Bang / 2009). M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others b. CIT v/s PNC Construction Co Ltd (2015) 55 taxmann.com 21 (Allahabad) c. Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (79 ITD 213) d. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (95 ITD 1) e. Transitory (India) Ltd v/s ITO, ward 2(2), Guntur (2011) 134 ITD 269 19. Further, CIT (A) has distinguished the decision relied upon by the AO in para 10.1 and 10.2 of the appellate order and has held that the same are not applicable to the facts of the appellant’s case. Here, it is important to note that decision rendered in the case of Katira…

Dilip Buildcon Ltd., Bhopal vs. DCIT (Central)-1, Bhopal

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 820/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…(P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898 / Bang / 2009). M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others b. CIT v/s PNC Construction Co Ltd (2015) 55 taxmann.com 21 (Allahabad) c. Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (79 ITD 213) d. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (95 ITD 1) e. Transitory (India) Ltd v/s ITO, ward 2(2), Guntur (2011) 134 ITD 269 19. Further, CIT (A) has distinguished the decision relied upon by the AO in para 10.1 and 10.2 of the appellate order and has held that the same are not applicable to the facts of the appellant’s case. Here, it is important to note that decision rendered in the case of Katira…

Dilip Buildcon Ltd., Bhopal vs. DCIT (Central)-1, Bhopal

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 819/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…(P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898 / Bang / 2009). M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others b. CIT v/s PNC Construction Co Ltd (2015) 55 taxmann.com 21 (Allahabad) c. Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (79 ITD 213) d. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (95 ITD 1) e. Transitory (India) Ltd v/s ITO, ward 2(2), Guntur (2011) 134 ITD 269 19. Further, CIT (A) has distinguished the decision relied upon by the AO in para 10.1 and 10.2 of the appellate order and has held that the same are not applicable to the facts of the appellant’s case. Here, it is important to note that decision rendered in the case of Katira…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Bhopal vs. Dilip Buildcon Limited, Bhopal

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 816/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…(P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898 / Bang / 2009). M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others b. CIT v/s PNC Construction Co Ltd (2015) 55 taxmann.com 21 (Allahabad) c. Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (79 ITD 213) d. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (95 ITD 1) e. Transitory (India) Ltd v/s ITO, ward 2(2), Guntur (2011) 134 ITD 269 19. Further, CIT (A) has distinguished the decision relied upon by the AO in para 10.1 and 10.2 of the appellate order and has held that the same are not applicable to the facts of the appellant’s case. Here, it is important to note that decision rendered in the case of Katira…

Dilip Buildcon Limited, Bhopal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Bhopal

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 782/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad&

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 80I

…(P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898 / Bang / 2009). M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others b. CIT v/s PNC Construction Co Ltd (2015) 55 taxmann.com 21 (Allahabad) c. Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (79 ITD 213) d. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (95 ITD 1) e. Transitory (India) Ltd v/s ITO, ward 2(2), Guntur (2011) 134 ITD 269 19. Further, CIT (A) has distinguished the decision relied upon by the AO in para 10.1 and 10.2 of the appellate order and has held that the same are not applicable to the facts of the appellant’s case. Here, it is important to note that decision rendered in the case of Katira…

Commissioner of Income Tax Udaipur vs. M/S Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd

The appeal stands dismissed with no order

C.A. No.-001764-001764 - 2010Supreme Court05 Mar 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR

Section 80

…the ITAT”) confirmed the decision of the first appellate authority, following its decision1 in the case of the assessee­Company for the Assessment Year 2001­2002. As a result, the Department preferred an appeal 1 Chetak Enterprises P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, (2005) 95 ITD 1 (Jodh.) 3 before the High Court. The High Court formulated the following question of law: ­ “Whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee­Company was right in finding that the assessee fulfilled the condition of sub­ Section (4)(i)(b) of Section 80­IA?” Section 80­IA, as applicable to Ass…

Welspun Projects Ltd.(Formerly Known As Msk Projects (India) Ltd.), Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Range-4, Baroda

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…Udyog Ltd., 123 TTJ 689 (Mum.) (5) Koya & Co. Construction P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 51 SOT 203 (Hyd.) (6) Om Metal Infra Projects Ltd. vs. CIT, 26 DTR 359 (Jaipur) (7) Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO, 79 ITD 213 (Indore) (8) Chetak Enterprises P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 95 ITD 1 (Jodhpur) (9) Ocean Sparkle Ltd. vs. DCIT, 99 TTJ 582 (Hyd.) 2.8 Various relevant issues have been considered by the Hon'ble Tribunal in the light of the findings in the above cases and the Hon'ble Tribunal has laid down the following parameters: (i) The assessee does not have to develop the entire infrastructure facility to qualify for deduction u/…

Welspun Projects Ltd.(Formerly Known As Msk Projects (India) Ltd.), Baroda vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Baroda

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1864/AHD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…Udyog Ltd., 123 TTJ 689 (Mum.) (5) Koya & Co. Construction P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 51 SOT 203 (Hyd.) (6) Om Metal Infra Projects Ltd. vs. CIT, 26 DTR 359 (Jaipur) (7) Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO, 79 ITD 213 (Indore) (8) Chetak Enterprises P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 95 ITD 1 (Jodhpur) (9) Ocean Sparkle Ltd. vs. DCIT, 99 TTJ 582 (Hyd.) 2.8 Various relevant issues have been considered by the Hon'ble Tribunal in the light of the findings in the above cases and the Hon'ble Tribunal has laid down the following parameters: (i) The assessee does not have to develop the entire infrastructure facility to qualify for deduction u/…

ACIT CC 39, Mumbai vs. United Liner Agencies of India P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 970/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2005-06 Acit, M/S United Liner Agencies Of Cc-6(4), R. No.32(1), India P. Ltd. बनाम/ Ground Floor, Godrej Coliseum, Office Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road No.801, C-Wing, Behind Mumbai-400020 Everard Nagar, Off Somaiya Hospital Road, Sion East, Mumbai-400022 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacu5182C Shri Narendra Kumar Cit-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Y. P. Trivedi & Usha Dalal

Section 80Section 80I

…and the facts of those cases and the case of the assessee are similar for which an affidavit has also been submitted by him which has not been controverted by the revenue. 25.14. Moreover, Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO, 79 ITD 213 (Indore) while interpreting the provisions of section 80IA(4), even in the absence of agreement, on recognition of the work done has come 34 M/s United Linger Agencies of India Pvt. Ltd.. to a conclusion that assessee was entitled to get deduction and reference can be made to the following observations: “18. If we examine the relevant provisions…

Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. v. ITO ( (95 ITD 1) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax