← All Phrases

“reference to TPO”

Assessment ProceduresSection 92CASection 92CA424 judgments

The decision most relied on for reference to TPO is PCIT v. Texport Overseas (P.) Ltd. (114 Taxmann.com 568), cited in 69 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reference to TPO

PCIT v. Texport Overseas (P.) Ltd.
114 Taxmann.com 568 · 2020 · High Court
69
citing judgments

A reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) is invalid and bad in law, which renders consequential Transfer Pricing adjustments by the Assessing Officer liable for deletion.

Sony India (P.) Ltd. v. CBDT & Anr.
288 ITR 52 · 2007 · High Court
39
citing judgments

A prima facie opinion by the Assessing Officer is sufficient to make a reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer. The Assessing Officer is not required to form a considered opinion after examining all materials before making a reference.

Delhi in Indorama Synthetics (India) Ltd. v. ACIT
386 ITR 665 · 2016 · High Court
13
citing judgments

CBDT Instruction No. 3/2016, clarifying the procedure for making references to the TPO, is retrospective and applies to pending cases, even where a reference was made before the instruction's issue. Such an instruction clarifies the existing legal position and is not a procedural change that should only apply prospectively.

Judgments citing reference to TPO

Jubilant Pharmova Ltd, Noida vs. ACIT-1Moradabad New, Utter Pradesh

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

ITA 1970/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1970/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Jubilant Pharmova Ltd., Acit-1, Plot-1A, Sector-16A, District G.B. Vs. Moradabad-New, Nagar, Noida,Uttar Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aabcv0200H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5713/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 बनाम Jubilant Pharmova Ltd., Dcit/Acit (Central), Bhartiagram Gajraula, Vs. Income Tax Department, Plot-1A, Sector-16A,District G.B. Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh. Nagar, Noida,Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aabcv0200H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 92C

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Vatika Seven Elements Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1525/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2018-19]

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Denso Subros Thermal Engineering Centre P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 1486/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accountnat Member

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Denso India Private Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-7(1), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 1485/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accountnat Member

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Denso India Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 1484/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accountnat Member

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Itron India P.Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1235/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalitron India P. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Flat No. 507, Income Tax, Circle 10(1), Bhikajicamabhawan, C. R. Building, New Delhi Bhikajicama Place, New Delhi Pan: Aabcs6575L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh.Kashish Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Ahresty India Pvt. Ltd., Rewari vs. ACIT, Circle, Rewari

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 7415/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahayahresty India Private Limited Vs Acit (Ld. A.O.) Plot No. 194, Sector-4, Phase Ii, Circle-Rewari, Haryana Hsidc, Growth Centre, Bawlal, Distrewari, Haryana, 123501 Pan: Aagca1057N Appellant Respondent Assessee By Ms. Snigdha Gautam, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 28/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 92C

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Ls Cable India P.Ltd., Rewari vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-5, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 4665/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Ls Cable India Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1961/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

M/S. Cosmo Films Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 1580/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahaycosmo Films Ltd. Vs Ddit 1008, Dlf Tower-A, Circle-3(1), Jasola District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacc1152C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

M/S Cosmo Films Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 4453/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahaycosmo Films Ltd. Vs Ddit 1008, Dlf Tower-A, Circle-3(1), Jasola District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacc1152C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

M/S. Cosmo Films Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 1192/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahaycosmo Films Ltd. Vs Ddit 1008, Dlf Tower-A, Circle-3(1), Jasola District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacc1152C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

M/S. Cosmo Films Ltd., New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 2348/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahaycosmo Films Ltd. Vs Ddit 1008, Dlf Tower-A, Circle-3(1), Jasola District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacc1152C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Cosmo Films Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 2135/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Krinwant Sahaycosmo Films Ltd. Vs Ddit 1008, Dlf Tower-A, Circle-3(1), Jasola District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacc1152C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Yanmar Agricultural Machinery India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Claas India Private Limited), New Delhi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 4(2), New Delhi

ITA 6034/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22
Section 144C(13)

ITA Nos. 5982/D/2024,1994/D/2022, 5991/D/2024, 5992/D/2024, 6034/D/2024,1186/D/2022,422/D/2021 & 1813/D/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”NEW

Munjal Hospitality Private Limited, Gugaon vs. DCIT, Circle 17(1), Delhi

In the result, all appeals as per ITA Nos

ITA 6031/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6031/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 बनाम Munjal Hospitality Private Limited, The Assessing Officer, Um House, Plot No.35, Vs. National Faceless 3Rd Floor, Tower A, Sector-44, Assessment Centre, Dlf Qe, Gurgaon, Haryana, India. Circle-17(1), Pan No.Aaccv4293M C.R. Building, Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 92C

passed within the extended period, as otherwise the extension becomes meaningless. (e) The outer time limit of 33 months in case of reference to TPO under Section 153, would not refer to draft order, but only to final order and hence, the entire proceedings would have to be concluded within

Escorts Kubota Limited (Escorts Kubota India Private Limited Merged With Escorts Kubota Limited), Faridabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad

ITA 5992/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5982/Del/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mmtc-Pamp India Private Limited, 221, Ground Floor, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. बनाम Dcit, Vs. Circle-16(1),C.R. Building, Indraprastha Marg, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. Pan No.Aafcm3576K अपीलार्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By Ms. Sherry Goyal, Adv. & Ms. Viyushti Rawat, Adv. Revenue By Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit Dr आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1994/Del/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Good Year India Ltd., Mathura Road, Ballabhgarh, District Faridabad, Faridabad, Haryana. बनाम Acit (Osd), Vs. Circle 10(1), C.R. Building, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacg3511H अपीलार्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv., Shri Ramit Katyal, Ar Shri Dhruv Seth, Adv. & Ms. Mansha Bhalla, Ar Revenue By Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit Dr Bergen Engines (India) Private Limited, बनाम आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5991/Del/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2021-22 2Nd Floor, 52B, Okhla Industrial Estate, Dcit, Vs. Circle-4(2), C.R. Building, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. I.P. Estate, Delhi. Pan No.Aaecb7223M अपीलार्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By Shri Ankit Sahni, Adv., Ms. Taranjeet Kaur, Ar & Revenue By Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. (Virtual) Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit Dr

Section 144C(13)

ITA Nos. 5982/D/2024,1994/D/2022, 5991/D/2024, 5992/D/2024, 6034/D/2024,1186/D/2022,422/D/2021 & 1813/D/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”NEW

Bergen Engines (India) Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

ITA 5991/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22
Section 144C(13)

ITA Nos. 5982/D/2024,1994/D/2022, 5991/D/2024, 5992/D/2024, 6034/D/2024,1186/D/2022,422/D/2021 & 1813/D/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”NEW

Mmtc-Pamp India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 16(1), New Delhi

ITA 5982/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthi

Section 144C(13)

ITA Nos. 5982/D/2024, 1994/D/2022, 5991/D/2024, 5992/D/2024, 6034/D/2024, 1186/D/2022, 422/D/2021 & 1813/D/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I” NEW

Persolkelly India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 19(1), Delhi

ITA 5939/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthi

Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 92C

ITA No.1939/D/2022, 5939/D/2024, 525/D/2022, 5602/D/2024 + SA 650/Del/2025 & 1503/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”NEW DELHI BEFORE