Search: transfer pricing

2 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 92Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai122 Delhi112 Ahmedabad31 Hyderabad19 Bangalore18 Pune15 Kolkata13 Jaipur9 Chennai9 Dehradun6 Surat4 Visakhapatnam4 Indore2 Chandigarh2 Agra2 Nagpur1 Raipur1 Rajkot1 Cuttack1 Varanasi1 Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 271A4 Section 270A(2)(a)4 Section 270A3 Section 92C2 Section 143(3)2 Section 271(1)(c)2 Penalty2

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 documentation which contained the functional and economic analysis of the assessee and the comparables and no adverse inference was drawn in respect of International and Specified Domestic Transactions so undertaken by the assessee in terms of his order passed under section 92CA(3) dt. 28/09/2017. At the same time, the TPO in his order has stated that

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

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

M/S SHREE GANESH JEWELLERS LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE V(1), LUDHIANA