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.

5 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 256(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi396Mumbai354Karnataka246Jaipur132Bangalore107Ahmedabad84Cochin73Chennai72Kolkata67Visakhapatnam28Pune23Cuttack23Hyderabad20Calcutta19Indore17Chandigarh16Telangana13Lucknow12SC11Rajkot11Nagpur11Raipur6Surat6Amritsar5Agra4Rajasthan3Allahabad2Jodhpur2Dehradun2Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 26316Section 271D8Section 269S6Section 40A(3)4Section 143(3)3Addition to Income3Section 2502Section 36(1)(iii)2Section 36

SH. MANJIT KRISHAN MALHOTRA,ABOHAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCME TAX , BATHINDA

The appeals of the assessee are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 39/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Puri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 263Section 269SSection 271D

256, should not interfere with findings of fact unless they are based on no evidence or are perverse or unreasonable. It is settled law that a High Court hearing a reference under the Act does not exercise any appellate or revisional or supervisory jurisdiction over the Tribunal and that it acts purely in an advisory capacity. If the Tribunal, after

SHRI. MANJIT KRISHAN MALHOTRA,ABOHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BATHINDA

2
Depreciation2
Disallowance2
Penalty2

The appeals of the assessee are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 40/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Puri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 263Section 269SSection 271D

256, should not interfere with findings of fact unless they are based on no evidence or are perverse or unreasonable. It is settled law that a High Court hearing a reference under the Act does not exercise any appellate or revisional or supervisory jurisdiction over the Tribunal and that it acts purely in an advisory capacity. If the Tribunal, after

MEASAGE TAU AGRO SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2), FEROZEPUR

In the result the ground no

ITA 324/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(3)

256/- is added back with the total income. 3.2.In other issue, Rs.10 lac was added back with the total income of the assessee on account of share application money which was converted to loan and said loan was not mentioned in the tax audit record. So, the loan amount of Rs.10 lac from directors was added back with the total

MEASAGE.TAU AGRO SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(4), FARIDKOT

In the result the ground no

ITA 325/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(3)

256/- is added back with the total income. 3.2.In other issue, Rs.10 lac was added back with the total income of the assessee on account of share application money which was converted to loan and said loan was not mentioned in the tax audit record. So, the loan amount of Rs.10 lac from directors was added back with the total

SHRI SURINDER SINGH DECEASED,AMRITSAR. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 357/ASR/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora

For Appellant: Sh. Jatinder Nagpal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. S. Negi (D.R.)
Section 131(1)Section 143(3)Section 148(1)

transferred through the banking channel, was subsequently changed to be paid in cash. The matter, it is to be borne in mind, came to surface on the basis of a complaint. Then, again, why would one, as Sh. Surinder Singh ostensibly does, give POA to another, an unrelated person? This is more so as both are residents of Amritsar