← 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

Beumer India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1599/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

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

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 154

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

Eversub India Private Limited, Haryana vs. DCIT Circle-22(2), Delhi

ITA 782/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

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

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

1 ITA Nos. 548 & 782/Del/2022 Eversub India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH

Modi-Mundipharma Beauty Products Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Dehi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 725/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.725/धिल्ली/2022(नि.व. 2017-18) Modi-Mundipharma Beauty Products P. Ltd., 1400 Modi Tower, 98 Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaacm-5901-B बिाम Vs. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assisant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Delhi आअसं.672/धिल्ली/2021(नि.व. 2016-17) Le Passage Tours & Travels India P. Ltd., A-296, Basement, Conference Cabin, Shivalik, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaacl-8370-K बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 13(1), Cr Building, New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2071/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2012-13) Eberspaecher Suetrak Bus Climate Control Systems India P. Ltd., No.2/1, Soukya Road, Thirumalashettyhally, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560067 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aacce-3922-E बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 8(1), Cr Building New Delhi

For Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

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

Eversub India Private Ltd. (Formely As ' Subway Systems India Private Ltd., Haryana vs. DCIT Circle 22(2), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 548/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

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

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

Smart Cube India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-22(2), New Delhi

In the result, all ITA Nos

ITA 525/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1939/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Corteva Agriscience India Pvt. Ltd., Dct, 17Th Floor, Tower-C, Dlf Cyber Greens, Vs. Circle 4(2), Sector 25A, Phase-3, Gurgaon, Haryana. C.R. Building, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaace2462M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 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

Msd Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle -16(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2330/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

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

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

Beumer India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 2322/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

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

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 154

1 ITA No. 2322 & 1599/Del/2023 Beumer India (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH

Good Year India Ltd, Haryana vs. ACIT (OSD) Circle 10(1), C.R.Building, New Delhi

ITA 1994/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
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

Corteva Agriscience India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 4(2), New Delhi

ITA 1939/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 1939/Del/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Corteva Agriscience India Pvt. Ltd., 17Th Floor, Tower-C, Dlf Cyber Greens, Sector 25A, Phase-3, Gurgaon, Haryana. Pan No.Aaace2462M बनाम Dct, Vs. Circle 4(2), C.R. Building, New Delhi. अपीलार्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Advocate & Ms. Ashmita Sharma, Advocate (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit Dr आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5939/Del/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Persolkelly Inda Private Limited, Unit No.1202, 1203 & 1204, 12Th Floor, Tower-C, Unitech Cyber Park, Sector-29, Haryana. Pan No.Aabck6665K बनाम Dcit, Vs. Circle-19(1), C.R. Building, New Delhi. अपीलार्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By Shri Ankit Sahni, Advocate & Ms. Taranjeet Kaur, Ar Revenue By Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit Dr 1

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

Vedanta Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle, 25 (1), New Delhi

ITA 1813/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

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

Philip Morris Services India Sarl, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-2(2)(2) International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1604/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.1603 & 1604/धिल्ली/2022(नि.व. 2009-10 & 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Ms. Kanika SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

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

Philip Morris Services India Sarl, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-2(2)(2), International Taxation

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1603/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.1603 & 1604/धिल्ली/2022(नि.व. 2009-10 & 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Ms. Kanika SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

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

Vivo Mobile India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-25(1), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 1488/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

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

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

Vivo Mobile India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-25(1), Delhi

ITA 1487/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

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

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

1 ITA Nos. 1487, 1488 & 4408/Del/2024 Vivo Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI

Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle-4(2), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 1361/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalbaxter India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit 2Nd Floor, Tower C, Building Circle 4 (1) No. 8, Dlf Cyber City, Dlf C. R. Building, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan: Aaacb3906F Appellant Respondent

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

Baxter (India) Private Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle-4(2), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 1360/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalbaxter India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit 2Nd Floor, Tower C, Building Circle 4 (1) No. 8, Dlf Cyber City, Dlf C. R. Building, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan: Aaacb3906F Appellant Respondent

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

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

ITA 1186/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
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

Le Passage to India Tours & Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 13(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 672/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.725/धिल्ली/2022(नि.व. 2017-18) Modi-Mundipharma Beauty Products P. Ltd., 1400 Modi Tower, 98 Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaacm-5901-B बिाम Vs. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assisant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Delhi आअसं.672/धिल्ली/2021(नि.व. 2016-17) Le Passage Tours & Travels India P. Ltd., A-296, Basement, Conference Cabin, Shivalik, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaacl-8370-K बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 13(1), Cr Building, New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2071/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2012-13) Eberspaecher Suetrak Bus Climate Control Systems India P. Ltd., No.2/1, Soukya Road, Thirumalashettyhally, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560067 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aacce-3922-E बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 8(1), Cr Building New Delhi

For Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

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

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Limited (As Successor - in - Interest of Erstwhile Aricent Technologies Private Limited), New Delhi vs. Neac, New Delhi

ITA 600/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthi

ITA Nos. 5452/D/24, 1103/D/17,600/D/21 with SA 225/D/25, ITAS 4325/D/24,5747/D/24, 5319/D/24, 5735/D/24 & 5820/D/24 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Fena Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT National Faceless Centre, New Delhi

ITA 573/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

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

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI