BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

63 results for “transfer pricing”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai455Delhi294Jaipur116Chennai104Cochin77Ahmedabad73Hyderabad67Bangalore63Chandigarh58Rajkot55Indore52Kolkata49Nagpur30Surat29Agra20Guwahati20Pune19Jodhpur16Visakhapatnam16Raipur12Amritsar11Lucknow10Cuttack8Patna6Allahabad1

Key Topics

Addition to Income61Section 153A57Section 13247Section 143(3)44Section 133A32Section 14832Section 69B30Section 14725Section 263

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

ITA 1452/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This\nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent\nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the\nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale\nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 63 · Page 1 of 4

21
Survey u/s 133A15
Disallowance15
Bogus Purchases10
ITA 1444/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1446/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1451/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI V G SIDDHARTHA, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIR MS. MALVIKA HEGDE, BENGALURU

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2129/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1447/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1457/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI V G SIDDHARTHA, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIR MS. MALVIKA HEGDE, BENGALURU

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2130/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1445/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1456/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1448/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This fact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent statement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the excel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale consideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI V G SIDDHARTHA, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIR MS. MALVIKA HEGDE, BENGALURU

ITA 2132/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This\nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent\nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the\nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale\nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

ITA 1458/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This\nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent\nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the\nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale\nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI V G SIDDHARTHA, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIR MS. MALVIKA HEGDE, BENGALURU

ITA 2131/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This\nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent\nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the\nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale\nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

ITA 1459/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This\nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent\nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the\nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale\nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

ITA 1454/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This\nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent\nstatement recorded under Section 131 of the Act while explaining the\nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale\nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

ITA 1455/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: \nMs. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This\nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent\nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the\nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale\nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3) , , BANGALORE

ITA 1442/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This \nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent \nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the \nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale \nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1450/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This \nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent \nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the \nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale \nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

Appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1449/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

price of the same was for ₹3 crores only. This \nfact was duly explained by late Shri V G Siddhartha in the subsequent \nstatement recorded under section 131 of the Act while explaining the \nexcel sheet found from one Shri Sadananda Pujary. Thus, the sale \nconsideration for this land was ₹3 crores, was accounted for in the books