Search: transfer pricing | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

337 results for “transfer pricing”

Sorted by relevance

Delhi5,868 Mumbai5,735 Bangalore2,320 Chennai1,313 Kolkata1,109 Pune911 Hyderabad872 Ahmedabad857 Karnataka807 Jaipur495 Chandigarh337 Surat333 Indore294 Cochin258 Visakhapatnam162 Rajkot145 SC135 Telangana114 Lucknow94 Cuttack93 Nagpur92 Calcutta76 Raipur73 Amritsar63 Jodhpur39 Guwahati39 Agra39 Dehradun38 Jabalpur18 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN17 Ranchi17 Kerala15 Rajasthan14 Panaji13 Varanasi13 Allahabad12 Patna11 Orissa9 Punjab & Haryana4 Andhra Pradesh2 S.B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 ANIL R. DAVE DIPAK MISRA1 T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 DIPAK MISRA V. GOPALA GOWDA1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)66 Section 26357 Addition to Income36 Section 14825 Section 143(2)24 Section 69A20 Section 80I19 TDS18 Section 12716

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 299/CHANDI/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80ISection 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer and after examining complete details a possible view has been taken by the Transfer Pricing Officer before

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH

Showing 1–20 of 337 · Page 1 of 17

...

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 300/CHANDI/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80ISection 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer and after examining complete details a possible view has been taken by the Transfer Pricing Officer before

SARASWATI AGRO CHEMICALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD,MOHALI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), MOHALI

In the result, the transfer pricing adjustment so made by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) amounting to Rs 89,22,420/- is hereby set-aside and the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 165/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Gupta, C.A and Shri Akshun Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

transfer pricing proceedings, the Transfer Pricing Officer completed the transfer pricing proceedings ex-parte with an enhancement of 10% of the specified

M/S JSK INTERNATIONAL,BADDI vs. PR. CIT, SHIMLA

The appeal of the Assessee is Allowed

ITA 643/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. Satish AgarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 80I

transfer pricing provisions in respect of international transactions. Similar guidance in respect of transfer pricing provisions pertaining to specified domestic

M/S NECTAR LIFESCIENCE LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1497/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Monga, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR

Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 271Section 80

transfer pricing methods provided in the Income Tax Act to arrive at Arm's Length Price and allowing transfer of steam

PAREXEL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT.LTD,,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-5(1),(NEAC), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 129/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, CAFor Respondent: Shri Reuben Mathew Jacob, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(C)

transfer pricing methodology adopted by the Appellant in its Transfer pricing study which was in good faith and with due diligence

M/S YAMUNA POWER & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,JAGADHRI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1229/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 80ISection 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determining the Arms Length Price in respect of International transactions and specified domestic transactions entered

DAMANDEEP KAUR,MOHALI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE-2), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 900/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

Transfer Pricing Officer, the Transfer Pricing Officer made a variation to the Arm's Length Price and valued the transaction

M/S HIMALYAN CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERS,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

ITA 478/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S GANGA CONSTRUCTIONS,SANGURUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

ITA 475/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S CHENAB CONSTRUCTION,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

ITA 480/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S ADARSH CONSTRUCTIONS AND ENGINEERS,SANGRUR vs. PR.CIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

ITA 476/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S AMAR CONTRUCTION AND ENGINEER ,SANGRUR vs. PCTI, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

ITA 479/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S HIND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERS CONTRCTORS,SANGRUR vs. PR.CIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

ITA 474/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S ANAND ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SANGURUR vs. PR.CIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

ITA 477/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S AMBEY ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS,NEW DELHI vs. PR.CIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

ITA 473/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S OMKAR ENGINEER AND CONTRACTOR,SANGRUR vs. PCTI, PATIALA

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 484/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjit Singh, CIT DR

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S OM CONTRACTOR AND ENGINEERS,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 485/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjit Singh, CIT DR

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 481/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjit Singh, CIT DR

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests

M/S MAA BHAGWATI ENTERPRISES,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 483/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjit Singh, CIT DR

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 44A

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests