Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 271(1)(c), Section 80-IA, Section 139, Section 147.

Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others (352 ITR 513)

Q: What is Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others authority for?

The Gujarat High Court holds that the explanation to Section 80-IA(4) of the Income-tax Act, regarding works contracts for infrastructure facilities, is clarificatory and explanatory in nature, not an amendment with retrospective effect. Its vires are upheld as it does not levy tax retrospectively.

Q: How many judgments cite Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others?

70 judgments on BharatTax cite Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others (352 ITR 513), spanning 2015 to 2025.

JAYANTI S KUNDHADIYA, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 231/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 143(2)Section 80

…4 ITR 530 (Karnataka) iii) B.T. Patil & Sons Belgaum Construction (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2010) 1 ITR(T) 703 (Mumbai)(LB) iv) M/s. NEC NCC Maytas vs. DCIT vide ITA No.496/Hyd/2018 & Ors. order dated 12.05.2021 v) Katira Construction Ltd. vs. Union of India (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) vi) Yojaka Marine (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 25 taxmann.com 260 (Bangalore) 20. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Referring to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Patel Engg. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2005) 94 ITD 411 (Mumbai), he submitted that the Tribunal in…

JAYANTI S KUNDHADIYA, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 230/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 143(2)Section 80

…4 ITR 530 (Karnataka) iii) B.T. Patil & Sons Belgaum Construction (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2010) 1 ITR(T) 703 (Mumbai)(LB) iv) M/s. NEC NCC Maytas vs. DCIT vide ITA No.496/Hyd/2018 & Ors. order dated 12.05.2021 v) Katira Construction Ltd. vs. Union of India (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) vi) Yojaka Marine (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 25 taxmann.com 260 (Bangalore) 20. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Referring to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Patel Engg. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2005) 94 ITD 411 (Mumbai), he submitted that the Tribunal in…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 229/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 143(2)Section 80

…4 ITR 530 (Karnataka) iii) B.T. Patil & Sons Belgaum Construction (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2010) 1 ITR(T) 703 (Mumbai)(LB) iv) M/s. NEC NCC Maytas vs. DCIT vide ITA No.496/Hyd/2018 & Ors. order dated 12.05.2021 v) Katira Construction Ltd. vs. Union of India (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) vi) Yojaka Marine (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 25 taxmann.com 260 (Bangalore) 20. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Referring to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Patel Engg. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2005) 94 ITD 411 (Mumbai), he submitted that the Tribunal in…

SABIR, SEW 7 PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 214/HYD/2019[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.212 To 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA Nos.212 to 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09) | M/s. SABIR, SEW & | The Deputy Commissioner of | PRASAD, JV, | Vs. | Income Tax, | Hyderabad. | Circle - 6(1), | Hyderabad. | PAN : ABCFS2425A | अपीलार्थी / Appellant | प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee by: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue by: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR…

SABIR, SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 213/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.212 To 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA Nos.212 to 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09) M/s. SABIR, SEW & PRASAD, JV, Hyderabad. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 6(1), Hyderabad. PAN : ABCFS2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee by: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue by: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/D…

SABIR , SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 212/HYD/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 801ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA Nos.212 to 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09) | M/s. SABIR, SEW & PRASAD, JV, Hyderabad. PAN : ABCFS2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 6(1), Hyderabad. प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee by: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue by: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date…

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, MADHAPUR

ITA 689/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: \nShri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nMs. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…ntract awarded by any person (including the central or state\ngovernment) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in\nsub-section (1).\"\n11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs.\nUnion of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the\nlatter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than\namending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being\nlevying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly\nclear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature\nof a plain and si…

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, MADHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 688/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, HYDERABAD

ITA 682/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

CELESTIAL AVENUES PVT LTD REP. BY CSK PROPERTIES PVT LTD ON MERGER-PAN-AADCC3990R,HYDERABAD. vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 212/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.212 To 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/S. Sabir, Sew & The Deputy Commissioner Of Prasad, Jv, Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Abcfs2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 801ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA Nos.212 to 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09) M/s. SABIR, SEW & The Deputy Commissioner of PRASAD, JV, Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 6(1), Hyderabad. PAN : ABCFS2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 80/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 79/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 78/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 77/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 75/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 74/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

NCC LIMITED, ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 73/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1)." 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,, MUMBAI CITY

In the result, appeals of the revenue and CO’s of assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2032/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 90/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri . East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 91/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg0569P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & Respective Cross Objections (‘Co’) Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31-03-2023 For Ay 2008-09 & Ay 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (DR)

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…orities with prescribed time. C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd 85. In this regard reliance can be placed on the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Katira Construction Ltd. v. UOI [2013] 31 taxmann.com 250/214 Taxman 599/352 ITR 513, wherein Court held as under:- "32. It is true that with effect from 1-4-2002 some significant changes were made in the said provisions. Three of these changes which are material were: (i) that sub-section (4) of section 80-IA now required the enterprise to carry on the business of developing or operating and maintaining or developing, operating…

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue and CO’s of assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2031/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 90/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri . East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 91/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg0569P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & Respective Cross Objections (‘Co’) Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31-03-2023 For Ay 2008-09 & Ay 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (DR)

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…orities with prescribed time. C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd 85. In this regard reliance can be placed on the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Katira Construction Ltd. v. UOI [2013] 31 taxmann.com 250/214 Taxman 599/352 ITR 513, wherein Court held as under:- "32. It is true that with effect from 1-4-2002 some significant changes were made in the said provisions. Three of these changes which are material were: (i) that sub-section (4) of section 80-IA now required the enterprise to carry on the business of developing or operating and maintaining or developing, operating…

ACC LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 800/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…nsfer the infrastructure facility to the concerned government authorities with prescribed time. 85. In this regard reliance can be placed on the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Katira Construction Ltd. v. UOI [2013] 31 taxmann.com 250/214 Taxman 599/352 ITR 513, wherein Court held as under:- "32. It is true that with effect from 1-4-2002 some significant changes were made in the said provisions. Three of these changes which are material were: (i) that sub-section (4) of section 80-IA now required the enterprise to carry on the business of developing or operating and maintaining or developing, operating…

Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others

What is Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others

JAYANTI S KUNDHADIYA, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, MUMBAI

JAYANTI S KUNDHADIYA, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, MUMBAI

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, MUMBAI

SABIR, SEW 7 PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

SABIR, SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

SABIR , SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, MADHAPUR

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, MADHAPUR

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, HYDERABAD

CELESTIAL AVENUES PVT LTD REP. BY CSK PROPERTIES PVT LTD ON MERGER-PAN-AADCC3990R,HYDERABAD. vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD.

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

NCC LIMITED, ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, HYDERABAD

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,, MUMBAI CITY

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,, MUMBAI

ACC LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI