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.

17 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 15Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai40Delhi32Bangalore17Pune13Indore5Kolkata5SC4Ahmedabad4Varanasi4Telangana3Jaipur2Karnataka1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 4021Section 143(3)16Section 3711Section 19511Double Taxation/DTAA10Deduction9Disallowance8Section 133A7Section 9(1)(vii)

GLOBAL E-BUSINESS OPERATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 174/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, D.R
Section 144(3)Section 37Section 92C

price received for the services by them will be determined by market forces, which is not the case of the assessee. The assessee itself can be characterized as a contract service provider, which means that it operates on a cost plus model. Therefore, this argument was also rejected. 28. Thus, the DRP upheld the rejection of this company

EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

7
Transfer Pricing7
Comparables/TP7
Section 92C6

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 258/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 258/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Eit Services India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy #39/40, Digital Park, Commissioner Of Electronic City Phase Income Tax, Ii, Circle – 2(1)(1), Hosur Road, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaacd4078L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Ca Revenue By : Shri Praveen Karanth, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 04-01-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 14/02/2022 Passed By Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. General Ground 1.1. The Orders Passed By Learned Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Income- Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As "Ao" For Brevity), Learned Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tp) — 1(2)(1), Bangalore (Hereinafter Referred As "Tpo" For Brevity) & The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel - 1, Bengaluru (Hereinafter Referred As "Drp" For Brevity) ("Ao", "Tpo" & "Drp"

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, CIT-DR
Section 37Section 92C

transfer pricing analysis. 7.12. Regarding comparable companies, one has to fall back upon only on information available in public domain. If that information is insufficient, it is beyond the power of the assessee to produce correct information about comparable companies. Revenue on the other hand has sufficient powers u/s.133(6) to Page 19 IT(TP)A No. 258/Bang/2022 compel production

GLOBAL E-BUSINESS OPERATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 212/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sri.P.C.Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Issue (Ground 1.12 & Ground 1.13) 5. The learned AR submitted that, as regards ground 1.12 is concerned, the issue in question is squarely covered by the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s group cases in the case of EIT Services India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT in IT(TP)A No.210/Bang/2021 (order dated 22.08.2022). It was stated that

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S CISCO SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal as well as Assessee’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 508/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Sri.Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Muzafar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)

transfer pricing documentation requirements. 11. The learned TPO / learned AO have erred, in law and in facts, by rejecting the filter of ratio of research and development expenses to sales less than 3% considered by the Appellant for 4 IT(TP)A No.505-508 & CO 135/Bang/2015 M/s.Cisco Systems (India) Pvt.Ltd. the purpose of selecting the companies which do not own intangibles

CISCO SYSTEMS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal as well as Assessee’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 505/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Apr 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Sri.Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Muzafar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)

transfer pricing documentation requirements. 11. The learned TPO / learned AO have erred, in law and in facts, by rejecting the filter of ratio of research and development expenses to sales less than 3% considered by the Appellant for 4 IT(TP)A No.505-508 & CO 135/Bang/2015 M/s.Cisco Systems (India) Pvt.Ltd. the purpose of selecting the companies which do not own intangibles

EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 210/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92D

transfer of product - financial & edge services as well as diversified activities like artificial intelligence, products services, platforms, consulting etc. Also onsite revenue was 52.7% and no segmental details like services, consulting products are available. In view of the above observations, the co-ordinate bench in assessee's own case for AY 2014-15 directed to exclude this company as comparable

HEWLETT PACKARD (INDIA) SOFTWARE OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED,2016-17 vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.213/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92C

transfer pricing adjustment is warranted. He stated that Finance Act, 2012 inserted Explanation to section 92B, with retrospective IT(TP)A No.213/Bang/2021 M/s. Hewlett Packard (India) Software Operation Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 73 effect from 1.4.2002 and sub-clause (c) of clause (i) of this Explanation provides that: (i) the expression "international transaction" shall include— . . . . . (c) capital financing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C-1(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. ALGONOMY SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MANTHAN SOFTWARE SERVICES PVT LTD), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed and the cross objections being C

ITA 946/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

transfer of skill and knowledge which falls within the ambit of technical services. The DRP has also confirmed the view of the A.O. The AO and DRP has erred in not appreciating that what should be made available is technical knowledge, experience, skill etc. Making available service does not make available knowledge, experience, skill etc. MSSPL has to approach

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C-1(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. ALGONOMY SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MANTHAN SOFTWARE SERVICES PVT LTD), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed and the cross objections being C

ITA 944/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

transfer of skill and knowledge which falls within the ambit of technical services. The DRP has also confirmed the view of the A.O. The AO and DRP has erred in not appreciating that what should be made available is technical knowledge, experience, skill etc. Making available service does not make available knowledge, experience, skill etc. MSSPL has to approach

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C-1(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. ALGONOMY SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MANTHAN SOFTWARE SERVICES PVT LTD), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed and the cross objections being C

ITA 945/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

transfer of skill and knowledge which falls within the ambit of technical services. The DRP has also confirmed the view of the A.O. The AO and DRP has erred in not appreciating that what should be made available is technical knowledge, experience, skill etc. Making available service does not make available knowledge, experience, skill etc. MSSPL has to approach

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE., BENGALURU vs. ALGONOMY SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY 2016-17 to 2018-

ITA 1196/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 14Section 195Section 37Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

transfer of skill and knowledge which falls within the ambit of technical services. The DRP has also confirmed the view of the A.O. The AO and DRP has erred in not appreciating that what should be made available is technical knowledge, experience, skill etc. Making available service does not make available knowledge, experience, skill etc. MSSPL has to approach

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. ALGONOMY SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY 2016-17 to 2018-

ITA 1226/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 14Section 195Section 37Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

transfer of skill and knowledge which falls within the ambit of technical services. The DRP has also confirmed the view of the A.O. The AO and DRP has erred in not appreciating that what should be made available is technical knowledge, experience, skill etc. Making available service does not make available knowledge, experience, skill etc. MSSPL has to approach

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. ALGONOMY SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY 2016-17 to 2018-

ITA 1229/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 14Section 195Section 37Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

transfer of skill and knowledge which falls within the ambit of technical services. The DRP has also confirmed the view of the A.O. The AO and DRP has erred in not appreciating that what should be made available is technical knowledge, experience, skill etc. Making available service does not make available knowledge, experience, skill etc. MSSPL has to approach

KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD,BANGALORE vs. DDIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed while the appeals by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 86/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

prices) are also determined on the basis of no. of leased hours of simulators made available to the Indian company and on the basis of the instructors fees etc. The AO in this regard has made reference to the charges for leased hours of simulator as laid down at appendix 1 of the agreement which were as follows:- “Charges

KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD,BANGALORE vs. DDIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed while the appeals by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 87/BANG/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

prices) are also determined on the basis of no. of leased hours of simulators made available to the Indian company and on the basis of the instructors fees etc. The AO in this regard has made reference to the charges for leased hours of simulator as laid down at appendix 1 of the agreement which were as follows:- “Charges

DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX,, BANGALORE vs. M/S. KING FISHER AIRLINES LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed while the appeals by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 144/BANG/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

prices) are also determined on the basis of no. of leased hours of simulators made available to the Indian company and on the basis of the instructors fees etc. The AO in this regard has made reference to the charges for leased hours of simulator as laid down at appendix 1 of the agreement which were as follows:- “Charges

DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX,, BANGALORE vs. M/S. KING FISHER AIRLINES LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed while the appeals by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 143/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 195Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

prices) are also determined on the basis of no. of leased hours of simulators made available to the Indian company and on the basis of the instructors fees etc. The AO in this regard has made reference to the charges for leased hours of simulator as laid down at appendix 1 of the agreement which were as follows:- “Charges