BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

3 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 44clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,219Mumbai2,132Bangalore838Chennai428Ahmedabad395Kolkata363Karnataka355Hyderabad303Jaipur265Pune196Chandigarh195Indore142Surat133Cochin127Calcutta57Visakhapatnam56Rajkot53SC47Lucknow42Cuttack40Raipur37Telangana37Nagpur31Amritsar28Agra27Guwahati24Jodhpur18Dehradun12Rajasthan9Varanasi9Ranchi8Kerala6Jabalpur5Panaji5Orissa3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Allahabad2DIPAK MISRA V. GOPALA GOWDA1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Andhra Pradesh1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 11A3Section 4(1)(a)2Section 42

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD vs. M/S. DETERGENTS INDIA LTD

C.A. No.-009049-009051 - 2003Supreme Court08 Apr 2015

Bench: Cegat Was Also Dismissed By The Impugned Judgment Dated 22.4.2003. 2

Section 4Section 4(1)(a)Section 4(4)(c)

transferred from one company to another; depots of Shaw Wallace and DIL were in the same premises; DIL sends monthly newsletters to Shaw Wallace showing production, despatches, purpose, technical problems, quality problems, details of power consumption etc. - and Shaw Wallace fixes the price of DIL products; and unsecured loans of approximately Rs.55 lakhs were given by Shaw Wallace

M/S. PUROLATOR INDIA LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-III

Appeal is disposed of accordingly

C.A. No.-001959-001959 - 2006Supreme Court25 Aug 2015
Section 11ASection 11A(1)Section 38ASection 4

44,66,247/- on assessee under the provisions of Section 11AC ibid; (iv) impose a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on assessee in terms of provisions of Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001 both read 4 Page 5 JUDGMENT with section 38A of the Central Excise

COMMNR.,CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, KERALA vs. M/S. LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD

Appeals are disposed of

C.A. No.-006770-006770 - 2004Supreme Court20 Aug 2015

price would be left to the whims and fancies of the assessing authority. This argument was repelled by this Court after setting out Sections 2(g) and 2(ja), which define “sale” and “works contract”. The Court then went on to discuss Sections 9(2) and 13(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Section 9(2) of the Central