Which cases are most cited on Section 80?

Similarly, in CIT v. Whirlpool of India Ltd. (318 ITR 347) — 17 citing judgments; CIT v. Capital Electronics (261 ITR 4) — 8 citing judgments; CIT v. Hughes Escorts Communications (165 Taxmann 318) — 8 citing judgments; Maruti Insurance Broking Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (435 ITR 34) — 6 citing judgments; CIT v. Capital Electronics( Gariahat) (257 ITR 677) — 5 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 80?

BharatTax indexes 144 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 80 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 80 of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 80 of the Income Tax Act?

Similarly, in CIT v. Whirlpool of India Ltd. (318 ITR 347) is the decision most relied on for Section 80, cited in 17 judgments. Whether a business is considered 'setup' depends on the specific facts of each case, considering whether the business involves manufacturing or providing services, and the nature of those services.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.121

Section 80 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 121 (Submission of return for losses) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 121 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 80 is Similarly, in CIT v. Whirlpool of India Ltd. (318 ITR 347), cited in 17 of the 144 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80

318 ITR 347 · 2009 · High Court

citing judgments

Whether a business is considered 'setup' depends on the specific facts of each case, considering whether the business involves manufacturing or providing services, and the nature of those services.

CIT v. Capital Electronics

261 ITR 4 · 2003 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Hughes Escorts Communications

165 Taxmann 318 · 2007 · High Court

citing judgments

Maruti Insurance Broking Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

435 ITR 34 · 2021 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Capital Electronics( Gariahat)

257 ITR 677 · 2002 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 80

Yashpal Singh Yadav, Noida vs. ACIT Circle-2(3)91), Jhansi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 443/AGR/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra14 Oct 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: : Sunil Kumar Singhbrajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 193(3)Section 250Section 72Section 733Section 73ASection 74Section 743

Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Delhi vs. Bhudev Building Materials Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2009/DEL/2026[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2026

Bench: Ms Madhumita Roy & Shri Krinwant Sahayincome Tax Officer Vs. Bhudev Building Room No. 380, C. R. Materials Private Building, I. P. Estate, Limited, 4890, Gali New Delhi Devilian Lado Ghatti, A. K. Market, S.O. Central Delhi, 110055, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcb4319H

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahendra Singh, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 80

Vasantrao Desai Ajara Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Ajara vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolhapur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2288/PUN/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteassessment Year : 2016-17 Dy. Cit, Circle-1, Vasantrao Desai Ajara Shetkari Kolhapur Vs. Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Gat No. 25, 27, At Post Gavse, Tal.-Ajara, Kolhapur-416505 Pan : Aaaaa0496R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vasantrao Desai Ajara Shetkari Dy. Cit, Circle-1, Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Vs. Kolhapur Gat No. 25, 27, At Post Gavse, Tal.-Ajara, Kolhapur-416505 Pan : Aaaaa0496R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Ms. Bhavya. I.V., Jt. Cit Date Of Hearing : 03-09-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-09-2026

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Ms. Bhavya. I.V., Jt. CIT

Section 154Section 155(19)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(xvii)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1, Kolhapur vs. Vasantrao Desai Ajara Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Ajara

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2273/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Ms. Bhavya. I.V., Jt. CIT

Section 154Section 155(19)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(xvii)

Hospitech Management Consultants Pvt Ltd vs. Principal Commissioner Ofcentral Goods and Services Tax

Appeal is allowed

SERTA-15/2023HC Delhi01 Sept 2026

For Appellant: Dr. Prabhat Kumar, Mr. PralabhFor Respondent: Mr. Atul Tripathi, SSC with Mr

Section 35GSection 73(1)Section 77Section 78Section 83

Project Revolt LLP, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 24 3 1 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4118/MUM/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2026AY 2017-18

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80

Gluhend India Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT - 3(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 271/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: AAHCG1238N

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 156

Crest Steel and Power Private Limited, Rajnandgaon vs. PCIT, Central Circle, Bhopal

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 308/RPR/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jul 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.308/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Crest Steel & Power Private Limited Village-Joratari, Post-Mangatta, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441, Durg, Pan: Aaccc3836H

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rituparna Namdeo, CIT-DR

Section 139(3)Section 139(4)Section 263Section 263(1)

Karan Mehta, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 29.1, Kolkata

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

ITA 3057/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 70(2)Section 74(1)(a)Section 80

ITO, Rohtak vs. Piyare Lal Kishan Lal Educational & Social Trust, Hisar

ITA 6416/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Sanjay Awasthiita No. 6416/Del/2025 With C.O. No. 265/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sudip Majumdar, Sr. DR

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 80

234 Tyre World LLP, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals ITA

ITA 379/HYD/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 154Section 72Section 80

234 Tyre World LLP, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals ITA

ITA 378/HYD/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 154Section 72Section 80

234 Tyre World LLP, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals ITA

ITA 377/HYD/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 154Section 72Section 80

Piyushkumar Vrajlal Mehta, Gandhinagar vs. DCIT Circle (Int Taxn) 1, Ahm, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1246/AHD/2026[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Jul 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years: 2022-23

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250(6)Section 80

Shri Maruti Infrastructure Developer, Pune vs. DCIT Circle-7, Pune

In the result all the three appeals of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1591/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1589-1590 & 1591/Pun/2025 नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14-2014-15 & 2015-16 Vs Dcit Circle-7, Shri Maruti Infrastructure Developers, 507, 5Th Floor Pune Lunkad Sky Vista, New Airport Road, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014 Maharashtra Pan-Abnfs0599Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde-CIT and Shri Ajitesh

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 80

Shri Maruti Infrastructure Developer, Pune vs. DCIT Circle-7, Pune

In the result all the three appeals of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1590/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2026AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Smt Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde-CIT and Shri Ajitesh

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 80

Shri Maruti Infrastructure Developer, Pune vs. DCIT Circle-7, Pune

In the result all the three appeals of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1589/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2026AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Smt Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde-CIT and Shri Ajitesh

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 80

Trinity Opportunity Fund I, Mauritius vs. Assessing Officer-Int Tax Circle 4(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3140/MUM/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Blebeena Pillai & Hon’Ble Arun Khodpia

Section 143(2)Section 74

Tanisha Chaudhary, Noida vs. Ward 5(2)(4), Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 920/DEL/2026[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: BYRPC9943E

Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 72Section 73Section 74Section 74ASection 80

Mittal Enterprises, Delhi vs. JCIT(A), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the manner indicated above

ITA 3077/DEL/2026[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Ramit Kocharmittal Enterprises The Assessing Officer 1535, Bhagirath Palace Cpc, Income Tax Delhi-110006 V. Department, Bengaluru. Pan-Abafm8258K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sumit Kumar Goenka,Ca Department By Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2026

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80