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.

4 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 55Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai60Delhi30Surat16Pune14Kolkata14Ahmedabad12Bangalore4Chennai4Indore3Jaipur3Cochin3Lucknow3Hyderabad2SC2Raipur1Rajkot1Cuttack1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 1485Section 545Section 148A4Section 144C3Section 693Addition to Income3Section 1472Section 1442Section 1422

OAKNET HEALTHCARE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2097/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

transfer pricing adjustment as their own set of comparables contain profit margins less than the appellant's case and consequently, failure to demonstrate that additions made in these two hands, will make the entire proceeding discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Page 3 of 9 The revenue is put to strict notice that they have made adjustment

VAZHOOR SUDARSANAN THAMPI,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), WARD-2(1), BENGALURU

Appeal is partly allowed

Disallowance2
Comparables/TP2
ITA 893/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan Ka. Y. 2015-16 Appellant Respondent Vazhoor Sudarshanan The Income Tax Officer Thampi International Taxation Vazhoor House, Ward 2 (1) T C 5/1892Valappad Bangalore Vallapad Beach Thrissur Kerala 680567 Pan Afxpt6193D For Appellant Shri Sidhesh N Gadi, Ca For Respondent Dr. Divya K J Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19-08-2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28-08-2025

Section 142Section 143Section 144Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69

transferred on 1-10-2014 Rs 60,00,000/- in NRO Deposit Account. This was substantiated by producing the annual accounts of the companies where loan was shown as unsecured loan liability in the name of assessee, confirmation of the companies and bank statement of assessee with Federal bank. 20. Thus, assessee explained source of the deposit

SRI MOHAN PURI ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(2)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2925/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.R.E.Balasubramaniyan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni. JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 48Section 54Section 69A

price indicated in the sale deed. It was also argued that this amount is received due to the transfer of personal effects which is outside the definition of capital asset within section 2(14) of the I.T.Act. A copy of the sale agreement of movable dated 16.03.2014 is placed at page 51 to 60 of the paper book

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTL TAXN) CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S COFFEEDAY ENTERPRISES LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2931/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzzaffar Hussain, CIT (D.R)
Section 195

price. That means, interest which was accrued, was paid in the form of discounting of equity shares. This was an C.O. No. 42/Bang/2019 arrangement for evasion of taxes. Hence, though the assessee has not claimed any interest in the books, the interest was accrued (which was indirectly paid by the assessee) and TDS should have been with held which