A detailed discussion on Amendments to Section 80-IAC and ESOP by the Start-ups along with the topic of Angel Tax captured in a simplified way.

1. Start-up Tax issues -
Budget 2020 and beyond

2. Is Your Company A Startup?
Start-up India Action Plan
•Incorporated as a Private Limited Company, a Registered
Partnership Firm or a Limited Liability Partnership
•Period of existence and operations should not be exceeding 10
years from the date of incorporation
•Should have an annual turnover not exceeding INR 100 crore for
any of the financial years since its incorporation
•Entity should not have been formed by splitting up or reconstructing
an already existing business
•Should work towards development or improvement of a product,
process or service and/or have scalable business model with
high potential for creation of wealth & employment
Income Tax Act, 1961
•Incorporated/ registered as Private Limited Company/ Limited
Liability Partnership
•Incorporation: April 1, 2016 – April 1, 2021
•Annual turnover < INR 100 crores in the previous year relevant
to the assessment year for which tax holiday is claimed
•Working towards innovation, development or improvement of
products or processes or services, or should be a scalable
business model with a high potential of employment generation
or wealth creation
•Holds certificate from the Inter-Ministerial Board (IMB) as constituted
by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP)
•Subject to certain reconstruction provisions

3. Budget 2020 for
Start-ups

4. Proposed Relaxation for Start-ups in Budget 2020-21
India Budget for Fiscal Year 2020-21 proposes to rationalize the taxation on the profits of eligible start-up companies in
India with effect from April 1, 2020. In addition, the budget also proposes to relax and defer the taxation of ESOP
perquisites in the hands of employees of such start-up companies.
For Start-up Companies For Employees of Start-ups
Proposed in Budget 2020
• 100% tax holiday for 3 years
consecutively out of 10 years
only for "eligible" Start-ups
• To be eligible Start-up, turnover
shall not exceed INR 1 Billion in
the financial year for which tax
holiday is to be claimed
Earlier Provisions
• Only 7 financial years were
provided to claim tax holiday for
3 consecutive years;
• Turnover was earlier limited to
INR 0.25 Billion only
Proposed in Budget 2020
Tax on perquisite in the case of ESOPs
(ie tax on difference between FMV and
exercise price) is deferred to the earliest
of following dates:
a) Expiry of 5 years from relevant AY;
b) Date of sale of such securities; or
c) Date of termination of employment
Implications of the above
Start-ups employers would withhold tax
under Section 192 on such perquisites
only on the above deferred dates, and
not in the year of exercising ESOPs by
the employees

5. Key Insights
Amendments proposed for Start-up Companies
• Intent of the amendment is to incentivise start-ups in India by extending tax holiday benefits under Section 80-IAC and
keeping the same in line with the Notification of DPIIT dated February 19, 2019
• However, the benefit under Section 80-IAC (100 percent tax holiday) is available only for eligible start-ups as defined
in the Explanation (ii) to the Section 80-IAC of the IT Act
• An eligible start-up is a company or LLP which, fulfils certain prescribed conditions. These proposed amended
conditions (post Finance Bill 2020) are enlisted below:
1. Start-ups incorporated on or after April 1, 2016 but before April 1, 2021;
2. Turnover limit of INR 1 billion in the first year of claiming such tax holiday benefit; and
3. Certificate of eligible business as granted by Inter-Ministerial Board of Certification
In reality, start-ups are loss-making in the initial 5-7 years as they are chasing growth. Hence, a longer window of 10
years for availing tax holiday benefits vis-à-vis shorter time frame of 7 years previously, is a welcome move. A
clarification is needed that the clients/ customers of start-ups would not be required to deduct tax at source on
payments to be made to such start-ups. This would mean savings in terms of cashflows that today gets blocked as
TDS for 18-24 months. Also, by exempting profits from tax, the start-ups may perhaps not be eligible to carry forward
any tax losses made during the tax holiday period - thus, tax losses arising in the said period may not be available for
set-off against profits made in the future. Some clarity is required on this aspect as well. Minimum Alternate Tax
(MAT)/ Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT)* provisions continue to apply - rate of 18.5 percent on book profits, along with
applicable surcharge and cess (in case of profit-making ventures)

6. Key Insights (Cont.)
Amendments proposed for Employees of Start-up Companies
• The main aim of deferring the taxability event in case of ESOPs is to ease the burden of payment of taxes by the
employees and TDS compliances under Section 192 of the IT Act by such eligible start-up employer
• Therefore, two noteworthy consideration in relation to the proposed amendment are enumerated hereunder:
– Employees of "eligible" start-up companies only covered under Section 80-IAC of the Act would be entitled to the
benefit of this amendment
– Benefit of deferred taxable event would be available on options exercised on or after April 1, 2020 by the
employees of such eligible start-ups
• Deferral of such taxability event for employees of eligible start-ups would definitely assist in unlocking cash flows for
such employees
The Inter-Ministerial Board of Certification has approved and granted certificate to 260 start-ups (Refer Annexure) till
December 18, 2019 (40th Meeting), while there are 27,968 start-ups recognised by DPIIT. Thus, only 1 percent of start-ups
recognised by DPIIT are "eligible" for availing income tax related benefits, including tax holiday under Section 80-IAC and
deferred perquisite taxation proposed in the Finance Bill 2020. A list of eligible start-ups as approved by Inter-Ministerial
Board of Certification is provided as an Annexure. Further, the Memorandum to Finance Budget 2020-21 contradicts the
existing provisions of the IT Act. This anomaly is with regard to the year for which turnover is restricted to INR 1 Billion
(second condition in the definition of eligible start-up) as below:
– Income-tax Act: Turnover - in the previous year relevant to the assessment year for which deduction is claimed
– Memorandum: Turnover - in any of the previous years beginning from the year in which it is incorporated

7. Share Premium Tax
(Angel Tax)

8. Understanding the Context
• Section 56(2)(viib) of the IT Act also widely known as Angel Tax, has
been one of the leading controversial issue since its inception vide the
Finance Act, 2012
• Aims to tax excess premium received by a private company over Fair
Market Value ("FMV") upon the issue of shares
• Ultimately, such excess premium is deemed to be an income and
therefore is liable to tax in the hands of such private company under
section 56(2)(viib) of the IT Act
• Venture Capitalists are one of the major source of funding for new and
upcoming closely held (private) companies in India but Section
56(2)(viib) of the Act has been lurking around as a backdrop to it

9. Section 56(2)(viib) and its applicability
Provisions of
Section 56(2)(viib)
Any consideration for issue of shares
received by private company that exceeds
the face value of such shares, the
aggregate consideration received as
exceeds the FMV of such shares shall be
taxable under Section 56(2)(viib) of the IT
Act
[ if Sale Price > Face Value then,
Sale Price – FMV = Excess consideration taxable ]
FMV of shares of both listed and unlisted private
companies shall be determined as per the methods
prescribed in Rule 11U and 11UA of the Income-tax
Rules
All private companies in India, receiving consideration for issue
of shares from a resident comes under the purview of Section
56(2)(viib) of the IT Act. However, there are two exceptions
where the consideration is received by – (a) By a venture
capital undertaking from venture capital company or fund (b) By
company from a class of persons notified by Central Govt
CBDT Notification dated March 5, 2019 exempted the
start-up private companies from the provisions of Section
56(2)(viib) of the IT Act provided such companies shall
fulfil the conditions as specified in the DPIIT notification
dated February 19, 2019
Determination of FMV of shares and taxability of excess
premium under Section 56(2)(viib) has been a long litigated
matter between the companies and Indian tax authorities.
Profuse judicial precedents by various Tribunals and High
Courts in India have been shedding light on this issue

10. History of Section 56(2)(viib)
Provisions of Section
56(2)(viib) along with
Rules 11U and 11UA
were enacted into law
by the Finance Act
2012, with effect from
AY 2013-14
Introduction of Angel Tax
CBDT Notification dated
May 24, 2018
Section 56(2)(viib) is not
applicable if consideration
received from an investor
in accordance with the
approval granted by the
Inter-Ministerial Board of
Certification
2012
2018
2019
CBDT Notification dated
January 31, 2019
CBDT amended its 2018
notification, wherein the
approval was required to
be granted by CBDT and
not Inter-Ministerial
Board of Certification
CBDT Notification dated
March 5, 2019
CBDT exempted start-up
private companies from Section
56(2)(viib) provided such
companies fulfil conditions as
specified in the DPIIT
Notification dated February 19,
2019
CBDT Circular dated
August 30, 2019
CBDT issued a circular for
income tax assessment of
start-up private companies,
wherein it directed that
scrutiny with respect to
adjustments under Section
56(2)(viib) shall not be
pursued

11. Available Judicial
Precedents (Angel Tax)

12. Can the Tax officer compare revenues/ profits projected under DCF method vis-à-vis
actual revenue/ profit of the company and reject the valuation report?
Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd
Vs
DCIT
Mumbai Tribunal
• The AO/ CIT(A) had evaluated the accuracy of valuation at the time of assessment, ie comparing the
projections with the actual performance after the date of valuation report of the company
• The Hon'ble Tribunal held that the valuation of shares or for that matter any valuation in itself is a
projection of future events or activities and no doubt it has to be done with some accuracy, however no
person in the world at the time of projecting events or result, is expected to project with 100% of
accuracy and actual events are highly volatile and highly dependent on so many factors
A. Judgements favourable to Assessee
Bangalore Tribunal
Innoviti Payment Solutions
Pvt Ltd
Vs
ITO
• This ruling is positive in as much as it clarifies that for scrutinizing the valuation report, the facts and data
available on the date of valuation only has to be considered and actual result of future cannot be a basis
to decide about reliability of the projections
• Another important aspect is that the Tribunal held that it is the primary onus of the assessee to satisfy
about the "correctness" of the projections, discounting factor and terminal value etc with the help of
empirical data or industry norm if any and/or scientific data, scientific method, scientific study and
applicable guidelines regarding DCF method of valuation
Jaipur Tribunal
Rameshwaram Strong
Glass (P) Ltd
Vs
ITO
• DCF Method, is essentially based on the projections (estimations) and hence these projections cannot
be compared with the actuals to expect the same figures as were projected
• The Hon’ble Tribunal held that when the law has specifically provided a method of valuation and the
assessee exercised an option by choosing a particular method, changing the method or adopting a
different method would be beyond the powers of the Revenue Authorities

13. TUV Rheinland NIFE
Academy Pvt Ltd
Vs
ITO
Bangalore Tribunal
• The Hon’ble Tribunal considered the AO’s finding that the projections taken in the valuation were a long
way away from the actual figures
• It held that unless and until the assessee produces the evidences to substantiate the basis of projections
in cash flow and provides reasonable connectivity between those projections in cash flow with the reality
evidences by the material, it is not possible even for the Departmental Valuation Officer to conduct any
exercise of verification of the acceptability of the value determined
• Since the assesse could not provide any such evidence, this left no option to the AO but to reject the
DCF method and to go by NAV method to determine the FMV of the shares
B. Judgements against the Assessee
Delhi Tribunal
Agro Portfolio Private Ltd
Vs
ITO
The Hon’ble Tribunal held that in case the valuation under DCF is done on the projections provided by
the Management and the valuer (under DCF method) has categorically mentioned in the report as a
disclaimer that the truthfulness, accuracy and completeness of the information and financial data has
been provided by the company and the valuer has relied on the same, the assessing officer can reject
the DCF method and go by NAV method to determine the FMV of the shares.
Can the Tax officer compare revenues/ profits projected under DCF method vis-à-vis
actual revenue/ profit of the company and reject the valuation report?

14. Innoviti Payment
Solutions Pvt Ltd
Vs
ITO
Bangalore Tribunal
• The Hon’ble Tribunal held that the AO can scrutinize the valuation report and if not satisfied with the
explanation of the assessee, he has to record the reasons and basis for not accepting the valuation report
submitted by the assessee and only thereafter, he can go for own valuation or to obtain the fresh valuation
report from an independent valuer and confront the same to the assessee. But the basis has to be DCF
method and he cannot change the method of valuation which has been opted by the assessee
• It also held that it is the primary onus of the assessee to satisfy about the "correctness" of the projections,
discounting factor and terminal value etc with the help of empirical data or industry norm if any and/or
scientific data, scientific method, scientific study and applicable guidelines regarding DCF method of
valuation
A. Judgements favourable to the Assessee
Mumbai Tribunal
DCIT
Vs
Ozoneland Agro Pvt Ltd
It was held that section 56 allows the assessee to adopt one of the methods of their choice. The AO had
held that the assessee should have adopted only one method for determining the value of the shares. It
is beyond the jurisdiction of the AO to insist upon a particular system, especially the Act allows to choose
one of the two methods. Until and unless the legislature amends the provision of the Act and prescribes
only one method for valuation of the shares, the assessee is free to adopt any one of the methods
Does the assessee have an option to adopt either NAV or DCF method for valuation
of shares?

15. Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd
Vs
PCIT
Bombay High Court
• The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay held that the AO is undoubtedly entitled to scrutinize the valuation
report and determine a fresh valuation either by himself or by calling for a final determination from an
independent valuer to confront the assessee. However, the basis has to be the DCF Method and it is
not open to the AO to change the method of valuation which has been opted for by the assessee
• This view also finds support in the rulings of the Jaipur bench of the Tribunal in Rameshwaram Strong
Glass Pvt Ltd vs ITO and ACIT vs Safe Decore Pvt Ltd
A. Judgements favourable to the Assessee (Cont.)
Delhi Tribunal
Cinestaan Entertainment
(P) Ltd
Vs
ITO
• The Hon’ble Tribunal held that if the statute provides that the valuation has to be done as per the
prescribed method and if one of the prescribed methods has been adopted by the assessee, then AO
has to accept the same and in case he is not satisfied, then we do not we find any express provision
under the Act or rules, where AO can adopt his own valuation in DCF method or get it valued by some
different valuer
• In any case, if law provides the assessee to get the valuation done from a prescribed expert as per the
prescribed method, then the same cannot be rejected because neither the AO nor the assessee have
been recognized as expert under the law
India Today Online (P.) Ltd
Vs
PCIT
Delhi Tribunal
Where assessee allotted shares of a company held by it on premium and substantiated valuation of
shares to satisfaction of the AO that same was on basis of valuation report provided by valuer of said
company whose shares were held by it, wherein valuer had applied Direct Cash Flow (DCF) method
and said report was certified by an independent Chartered Accountant and the AO accepted such
valuation, Commissioner (Appeals) was unjustified in rejecting impugned valuation or valuation
method
Does the assessee have an option to adopt either NAV or DCF method for valuation
of shares?

16. B. Judgements against the Assessee
Delhi Tribunal
Agro Portfolio Private Ltd
Vs
ITO
• This precedent has been discussed earlier.
• The Hon’ble Tribunal held that in case the valuation under DCF is done on the projections provided
by the management and the valuer (under DCF method) has categorically mentioned in the report as
a disclaimer that the truthfulness, accuracy and completeness of the information and financial data
has been provided by the company and the valuer has relied on the same, the assessing officer can
reject the DCF method and go by NAV method to determine the FMV of the shares.
TUV Rheinland NIFE
Academy Pvt Ltd
Vs
ITO
Bangalore Tribunal
• This precedent has been discussed earlier.
• The Hon’ble Tribunal considered the AO’s finding that the projections taken in the valuation were a
long way away from the actual figures .
• It held that unless and until the assessee produces the evidences to substantiate the basis of
projections in cash flow and provides reasonable connectivity between those projections in cash flow
with the reality evidences by the material, it is not possible even for the Departmental Valuation
Officer to conduct any exercise of verification of the acceptability of the value determined.
• Since the assesse could not provide any such evidence, this left no option to the AO but to reject the
DCF method and to go by NAV method to determine the FMV of the shares.
Does the assessee have an option to adopt either NAV or DCF method for valuation
of shares?

17. Can the provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) be invoked in spite of the fact that
satisfactory explanation has been provided under Section 68 of IT Act?
Judgement against the Assessee
Sunrise Academy of
Medical Specialties
(India) (P) Ltd
Vs
ITO
Kerala High Court
• The Hon'ble High Court of Kerala has held that any premium received by a Company on sale of shares,
in excess of its face value, if the company is a private company, would be treated as income from other
sources, as seen from Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, which can be controlled by the provisions of
section 68 of the Act. Section 68 on the other hand, as substituted with the proviso, treats any credit in
the books of accounts, even by way of allotment of shares for which no satisfactory explanation is
offered, to be liable to income tax
• Section 56(2)(viib) is triggered at the stage of computation of income itself when the share application
money received, from a resident, by a private company, is above the face value
• If Section 68 is applicable, and the proviso is not satisfied, then the entire amounts credited to the books
would be treated as income. If satisfactory explanation is offered as to the source, then the premium
paid as revealed from the books will be brought to tax as income from other sources

18. Key aspects for Consideration
Private companies in India may consider the following key aspects of taxation on excess premium received
over FMV on issue of shares from a resident investor
A. Actuals vs Projected
DCF values
B. DCF or NAV method
of valuation
• Valuation of shares using DCF method is based on projections of future events
and cannot be estimated with 100% accuracy. Therefore, a valuation report by a
chartered accountant or a merchant banker cannot be compared with the actual
results at a later point in time
• However, the Management providing information for projections should be able
to substantiate to the tax officer, such information based made available during
valuation process to arrive at the share/ enterprise valuation
• Section 56(2)(viib) read with Rule 11UA prescribes two methods for
determination of FMV of the shares, ie DCF or NAV method, on the date of issue
of shares. It is at the option to choose one of the two options for valuation of its
shares
• The tax officer shall, during scrutiny of the valuation report, either propose
adjustments or obtain fresh valuation of the shares. Nonetheless, the method of
valuation as adopted by the Company should not be changed during the course
of its tax assessment
Valuation of shares to determine FMV

19. Annexure – List of
Start-ups approved by IMB
for income tax benefits

20. Annexure
No Start-up Companies No Start-up Companies
1 Cygni Energy Private Limited 24 Hakitech Private Limited
2 Bhurak Technologies Private Limited 25 Vadr Network Private Limited
3 Ahammune Biosciences Pvt. Ltd 26 Innodi Water Technologies Pvt. Ltd
4 Jaspers Concepts Pvt. Ltd 27 Vortex Solar Energy Private Limited
5 Incredible Devices Pvt Ltd 28 Testright Nanosystem Private Limited
6 Riots Solutions Pvt. Ltd 29 Bharatrohan Airborne Innovations Private Limited
7 Keed Agro Private Limited 30 Taraltec Solutions Private Limited
8 Med Invest Devices Pvt Ltd 31 Xu West Wang Private Limited
9 Shamukha Innvations Private Limited 32 Alpha Tub Innovations Private Limited
10 Chakr Innovation Private Limited 33 Aarna Biomedical Private Limited
11 Jvs Flow Control Opc Pvt. Ltd 34 Omiom Clean Tech LLP
12 Dynamit Innovations Private Limited 35 Dzeal Private Limited
13 Zeco Plast Recycling LLP 36 Zeolr Technologies
14 Ecomaxgo 37 Responscity Systems Private Limited
15 Bestek IT Systems LLP 38 Shashvi Remedies Opc Private Limited
16 Unesar Private Limited 39 Nebulaa Innovations Pvt Ltd
17 Doorbox Global LLP 40 Flycatcher Technologies LLP
18 Larica Led Products Pvt Ltd 41 Padmashree Manufacturing LLP
19 Multifun Technologies Pvt Ltd 42 Securefire Safety Industries Private Limited
20 Tatoll Teleserve Private Limited 43 Akxa Tech Private Limited
21 Cricketronics Private Limited 44 Nyokas Technologies Pvt Ltd
22 Bioprime Agrisolutions Pvt Ltd 45 Wayusaka Innovations Private Limited
23 Aquasense Private Limited 46 Omnibrx Biotechnologies Pvt. Ltd
Source: IMB Decisions available at https://www.startupindia.gov.in/

21. Annexure (Cont.)
No Start-up Companies No Start-up Companies
47 Aodh Lifesciences Private Limited 70 Sindhanai Artificial Intelligence Systems Pvt Ltd
48 Fabulyst Private Limited 71 Alacris Research & Development Private Limited
49 Sensehawk Technologies Private Limited 72 Vasitars Private Limited
50 Eunimart Multichannel Private Limited 73 Indira Astron Drive
51 Ledchip Indus Private Limited 74 Taimed Hygiene Pvt Ltd
52 Predible Health 75 Sheveer Intech LLP
53 Autonomus Logistics Technologies Private Limited 76 Shayna Ecounified India Private Limited
54 Vizara Technologies Private Limited 77 Spruce Up Industries Private Limited
55 Ethereal Machines Private Limited 78 Khethworks Private Limited
56 Virtaspace Private Limited 79 Thinkerbell Labs Private Limited
57 Thirdwatch Data Pvt Ltd 80 Niramai Health Analytix Private Limited
58 Meladath Auto Components 81 Ulti- Met Helmatron LLP
59 Happy Adda Studios Private Limited 82 Matisoft Cyber Security Labs Private Limited
60 Streak Helmets Private Limited 83 Signovate Technologies Private Limited
61 Delectrick Systems Private Limited 84 Nymble Labs Private Limited
62 Cerebroz Edutree LLP 85 Chargein Kiosk Private Limited
63 Lynk Ambupod Pvt Ltd 86 Genio Solutions LLP
64 Mcssan Itech Company LLP 87 Sunraysia Organics Private Limited
65 Jarsh Innovations Private Limited 88 Microgo
66 Neomotion Assisttive Solutions 89 Magnic Technologies Private Limited
67 Nanoclean Global Private Limited 90 Agricxlab Private Limited
68 Invento Makerspaces 91 Cyton Mv Private Limited
69 Aesop Designs ( Opc) Private Limited 92 Kalki Ecosphere LLP
Source: IMB Decisions available at https://www.startupindia.gov.in/

22. Annexure (Cont.)
No Start-up Companies No Start-up Companies
93 Knox Innovations LLP 116 Balaji Staffing Solutions Private Limited
94 Cyrrup Solutions Private Limited 117 Bluethunder Comics Private Limited
95 Heelium Sports Private Limited 118 Cinfytech Web Systems Private Limited
96 Revy Environmental Solutions Private Limited 119 Conbuss Online Manufacturing Private Limited
97 Pentoreum Innovations Private Limited 120 Curious Kids Media Tech Private Limited
98 Tunwal E-Vehicle India Private Limited 121 Epic Vila Pro Services Private Limited
99 Udma Technologies Private Limited 122 Epvi Lighting Technology LLP
100 Haastika Handicrafts Private Limited 123 Fernweh Orbit Private Limited
101 Nueved Business Services Private Limited 124 Globalplay Media Technologies Private Limited
102 Northmist Private Limited 125 Green Chutney Films LLP
103 Kariwala Info Services Private Limited 126 Greenfield Agroscience LLP
104 Boxop Solutions India Private Limited 127 Happy Turtle (Opc) Private Limited
105 Darwin Travel Tech Private Limited 128 Kalpa Power Private Limited
106 Kumble Solar Energy Solutions Private Limited 129 Kryt Info LLP
107 Dnaerospace Private Limited 130 Kupchi Global Foods Private Limited
108 Axeon Ventures Private Limited 131 Lansiso Innovation Technologies Private Limited
109 I-Tech Mission Private Limited 132 Obii Kriationz Web LLP
110 Indshine Energy Private Limited 133 Oscki Labs Private Limited
111 Zld Technologies Private Limited 134 Overbridge Business Solutions Private Limited
112 Garveish Herbaceuticals Private Limited 135 Paynet Systems Private Limited
113 Airmed Pathology Private Limited 136 Peerxp Info Technologies Private Limited
114 Alcodes Mobility Private Limited 137 Performant Systems Private Limited
115 Avwebworld Private Limited 138 Pigeon Innovative Solutions LLP
Source: IMB Decisions available at https://www.startupindia.gov.in/

23. Annexure (Cont.)
No Start-up Companies No Start-up Companies
139 Positivenaick Analytics Private Limited 162 Golden App Private Limited
140 Purdian Technologies Private Limited 163 Grow Well Organic And Eco Products Ltd
141 Renascence Talent Solutions (Opc) Private Limited 164 Honasa Consumer Private Limited
142 Sattvic Goa LLP 165 Hps Lab Designs Private Limited
143 Skyroot Aerospace Private Limited 166 Icuboid Private Limited
144 Somo Media Private Limited 167 Jewelxy Marketplace Private Limited
145 Thangvung Privilege Services Private Limited 168 Jugadee Services Private Limited
146 Toujours Training Private Limited 169 Juru Yoga Private Limited
147 Valectus Private Limited 170 Karo Sambhav Private Limited
148 Wiwitan Solutions India Private Limited 171 Navia Life Care Private Limited
149 3Cad Hospitality Limited Liability Partneirfhip 172 Nithi Ventures Private Limited
150 Aadvik Foods And Products Private Limited 173 Obsequium Global Services (India) Private Limited
151 Activelogica Lifescience Innovations P~Ivjfe Limited 174 Paramotor Digital Technology Private Limited
152 Afin Heal Th Care Solutions Private Limited 175 Quirkstation Retail Private Limited
153 Amaterasu Lifesciences LLP 176 Redcliffe Hygiene Private Limited Lcpnsumer Private Ltd
154 Anvayaa Kin Care Private Limited 177 Respirer Living Sciences Privpjte Ltd
155 Artisanal Drinks Private Limited 178 Rvm Recycle Private Limited
156 Cogos Technologies Private Limited 179 Sanitech Innovations LLP
157 Craft Academia Private Limited 180 Shibu Smart Solutions Private Limited
158 Embright Infotech Private Limited 181 Sky Jumper Sports And Amusements Pvt Limited
159 Eyedentify Systems Private Limited 182 Spawoz Technologies Private Limited
160 Faatso Online Private Limited 183 Teerhub Technology Private Limited
161 Francium Technologies Private Limited 184 22Bate7 Software Private Limited
Source: IMB Decisions available at https://www.startupindia.gov.in/

24. Annexure (Cont.)
No Start-up Companies No Start-up Companies
185 Addverb Technologies Private Limited 208 Nemocare Wellness Private Limited
186 Basava Pracheena Vaidya Anveshana Private Limited 209 Rrk A2Z Services Private Limited
187 Beable Health Private Limited 210 Orangecross Homehealth Private Limited
188 Ben & Gaws Private Limited 211 Timble Technologies Private Limited
189 Crecientech Infosystem Private Limited 212 Communifi Technologies LLP
190 Drivamp LLP 213 Lemuria Digital Marketing Private Limited
191 Eduvanz Financing Private Limited 214 Nullpointer Analytics Private Limited
192 Giftolexia Solutions Private Limited 215 Pequrel Microelectronics Private Limited
193 Newmodelmep Trading International (Opc) Private Limited 216 Ikshavaku Software Ventures India Private Limited
194 Proelectric Projects Private Limited 217 Techculture Solutions Private Limited
195 Raav Techlabs Private Limited 218 Bioheaven 360 Genotic Private Limited
196 Sjr Infomedia Ventures Private Limited 219 Neurapy Private Limited
197 Sl4 Technology India Private Limited 220 Tfn Enterprise (Opc) Private Limited
198 Techsamvaad Private Limited 221 Scoutmytrip Private Limited
199 Trademill Technologies Private Limited 222 Arogyam Medisoft Solution Private Limited
200 Verteil Technologies Private Limited 223 Antargyan Cloudworks LLP
201 Wordsmaya Edutech Private Limited 224 Kiksar Technologies Private Limited,
202 Zodhana Mobile Solutions Private Limited 225 Cathect Technologies Private Limited
203 Progist Solutions LLP 226 Chamestudio Private Limited
204 Antargyan Cloudworks LLP 227 Digiotech Solutions Private Limited
205 Aahan Farm Private Limited 228 Electrosan Technologies Private Limited
206 Ev Techo Electra Motors Private Limited 229 Examble E-Private Limited
207 Saltech Design Labs Private Limited 230 Geton Infotech Private Limited
Source: IMB Decisions available at https://www.startupindia.gov.in/

25. Annexure (Cont.)
No Start-up Companies No Start-up Companies
231 Hopeberry Retail Private Limited 254 Suryalogix Private Limited
232 Ionnix Smart Systems Private Limited 255 Verbolabs Languages (OPC) Private Limited
233 Levant Solar Private Limited 256 Vizcom Animations LLP
234 Nell Infotech Private Limited 257 Wolkus Technology Solutions Private Limited
235 Nimble Vision Private Limited 258 Aseemshakti Enablers (Opc) Private Limited
236 Oncosimis Biotech Private Limited 259 Atlantech Online Services Private Limited
237 Payagri Innovations Private Limited 260 Peer Networks Private Limited
238 Saaibizz Ventures Private Limited
239 Shreeyansh Db Software Pvt Ltd
240 Aidia Technovations Private Limited
241 Bonanza Interactive LLP
242 Conexao Technology Solutions Private Limited
243 Couture Al Private Limited
244 Energeia Microgrid Private Limited
245 Fibcorp Polyweave Private Limited
246 Funvention Learning Private Limited
247 Kuza Technologies Private Limited
248 Podrones Logistics Private Limited
249 Roxiler Systems Private Limited
250 Sattwa Global Solutions Private Limited
251 Speechlogix Technologies Private Limited
252 Ssh Delicacies Private Limited
253 Study At Home Private Limited
Source: IMB Decisions available at https://www.startupindia.gov.in/

26. www.nangia-andersen.com
Thank You

27. Thank you
Sandeep Jhunjhunwala
Director
Nangia Andersen LLP
sandeep.jhunjhunwala@nangia-andersen.com
+91 97401 55469