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.

102 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 112clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi807Mumbai563Karnataka295Bangalore216Ahmedabad139Jaipur115Chennai102Chandigarh102Hyderabad100Indore87Cochin70Kolkata67Calcutta52Pune50Surat28Cuttack27Raipur25SC20Agra18Lucknow18Rajkot14Visakhapatnam13Telangana9Guwahati4Jodhpur3Nagpur3Rajasthan3Amritsar2Allahabad2Jabalpur1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1S.B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1

Key Topics

Addition to Income48Section 143(3)43Disallowance36Section 153A26Section 13224Section 10(38)17Transfer Pricing16Section 8015Section 28

TAMIL NADU BRICK INDUSTRIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 744/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.744/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Tamilnadu Brick Industries, The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Mangali Nagar 1St Street, Vs. Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106. Chennai. [Pan: Aafft3643P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Punna, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.05.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai, Dated 27.02.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 27.02.2017 In I.T.A.No.07/Cit(A)-9/2016-17 For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year Is Contrary To Law, Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Punna
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)

price and market value on conversion will be offered as business profits. Looking at the situation independently, one can say that the provision of section 45(2) could be relevant and appropriate. The fact of entering into agreements for development of land through such arrangements reflects that the character of holding of land changes factually. What was held as capital

Showing 1–20 of 102 · Page 1 of 6

14
Section 43(5)12
Section 143(2)11
Capital Gains11

HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING SOFTWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE 2(2), CHENN

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

ITA 113/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S.Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mr.V.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Srinivasa Rao Vara,CIT,D.R

sections 234B & 234C of the Act and Ground No.15 was against the initiation of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. The grounds Nos.14 & 15 were not argued by ld.A.R. Consequently, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 5. In regard to the transfer pricing issues, it was submitted by ld.A.R that the assessee has three lines of business

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD., KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 614/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

transfer pricing controversy. Ground no. 2 is thus allowed. 46. We may also add that ground no.1 in the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2009-10 is general in nature and it does not call for any specific adjudication. Tax withholding obligation from interest payments to Mauritian entities 47. In ground no. 3.1, the assessee is aggrieved

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 853/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

transfer pricing controversy. Ground no. 2 is thus allowed. 46. We may also add that ground no.1 in the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2009-10 is general in nature and it does not call for any specific adjudication. Tax withholding obligation from interest payments to Mauritian entities 47. In ground no. 3.1, the assessee is aggrieved

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. HYUNDAI MOTORS INDIA LTD., KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 761/CHNY/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2011-2012
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

transfer pricing controversy. Ground no. 2 is thus allowed. 46. We may also add that ground no.1 in the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2009-10 is general in nature and it does not call for any specific adjudication. Tax withholding obligation from interest payments to Mauritian entities 47. In ground no. 3.1, the assessee is aggrieved

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 563/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

transfer pricing controversy. Ground no. 2 is thus allowed. 46. We may also add that ground no.1 in the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2009-10 is general in nature and it does not call for any specific adjudication. Tax withholding obligation from interest payments to Mauritian entities 47. In ground no. 3.1, the assessee is aggrieved

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LIMITED, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 739/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

transfer pricing controversy. Ground no. 2 is thus allowed. 46. We may also add that ground no.1 in the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2009-10 is general in nature and it does not call for any specific adjudication. Tax withholding obligation from interest payments to Mauritian entities 47. In ground no. 3.1, the assessee is aggrieved

M/S. MAHINDRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS LTD.,,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 4 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13, 2013-14

ITA 338/CHNY/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.870/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.338 & 339/Chny/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan-For Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

112 of the paper-book, had exempted the assessee from the following duties and levies, subject to rules and regulations in this regard. “This is to certify that Ms. Mahindra Residential Developers Ltd., approved as a Co-Developer in the sector specific SEZ for IT/Hardware/Bio-informatics at Chennai, Tamil Nadu, developed by Ms. Mahindra World city Developers Ltd., and holder

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. C.H.ROBINSON WORLDWIDE FREIGHT INDIA P. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3444/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(3)

112 order dated 1.9.2016 wherein it was held as under: 7 The assessee objected to the adjustment made by the Transfer Pricing Officer. With regard to working capital adjustment, the asseessee claims that the difference in working capital between the assessee and the comparable companies - would materially affect the profit determined. Therefore, ‘certain CO No.28/Chny/2017 adjustment needs to be made

M/S. MAHINDRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS LTD.,,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 4 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13, 2013-14\n& 2014-15 stands dismissed

ITA 339/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2024AY 2014-15
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

112 of the paper-book, had\nexempted the assessee from the following duties and levies, subject to\nrules and regulations in this regard.\n\"This is to certify that Ms. Mahindra Residential Developers Ltd.,\napproved as a Co-Developer in the sector specific SEZ for\nIT/Hardware/Bio-informatics at Chennai, Tamil Nadu, developed by Ms.\nMahindra World city Developers Ltd., and holder

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AVT MC CORMICK INGREDIENTS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2169/CHNY/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Provisions. As per notification dated 24.06.2003, applicable to the assessee, the royalty was paid at 0.75% on FOB value of exports which is below 8% prescribed rate under the automatic route and supported the case with the decision of ACIT vs. Dufon Laboratoies (2010) 39 SOT 59 (Mum) and EKL Appliances (24 Taxmann 199). The Commissioner of Income

AVT MC CORMICK INGREDIENTS PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ADDL. CIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 58/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Provisions. As per notification dated 24.06.2003, applicable to the assessee, the royalty was paid at 0.75% on FOB value of exports which is below 8% prescribed rate under the automatic route and supported the case with the decision of ACIT vs. Dufon Laboratoies (2010) 39 SOT 59 (Mum) and EKL Appliances (24 Taxmann 199). The Commissioner of Income

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AVT MC CORMICK INGREDIENTS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2167/CHNY/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Provisions. As per notification dated 24.06.2003, applicable to the assessee, the royalty was paid at 0.75% on FOB value of exports which is below 8% prescribed rate under the automatic route and supported the case with the decision of ACIT vs. Dufon Laboratoies (2010) 39 SOT 59 (Mum) and EKL Appliances (24 Taxmann 199). The Commissioner of Income

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AVT MC CORMICK INGREDIENTS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2168/CHNY/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Provisions. As per notification dated 24.06.2003, applicable to the assessee, the royalty was paid at 0.75% on FOB value of exports which is below 8% prescribed rate under the automatic route and supported the case with the decision of ACIT vs. Dufon Laboratoies (2010) 39 SOT 59 (Mum) and EKL Appliances (24 Taxmann 199). The Commissioner of Income

REGEN POWERTECH PRIVATE LMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and Department are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 786/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Anuragh Sahay, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(xviii)Section 37(1)

Transfer Pricing Report. Under the erstwhile regulatory laws payment of royalty was permitted to the extent of 5% on domestic sales and 8% in respect of export sale. But in the present case, the rate of royalty has worked to 1.14% which is well within the regulated rates. The ld. TPO relied on the FEMA provisions and could not decide

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. REGEN POWERTECH (P) LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and Department are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 766/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Anuragh Sahay, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(xviii)Section 37(1)

Transfer Pricing Report. Under the erstwhile regulatory laws payment of royalty was permitted to the extent of 5% on domestic sales and 8% in respect of export sale. But in the present case, the rate of royalty has worked to 1.14% which is well within the regulated rates. The ld. TPO relied on the FEMA provisions and could not decide

MAHINDRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS LTD.,CHENGALPUT vs. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 870/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2024AY 2012-13
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

112 of the paper-book, had\nexempted the assessee from the following duties and levies, subject to\nrules and regulations in this regard.\n\"This is to certify that Ms. Mahindra Residential Developers Ltd.,\napproved as a Co-Developer in the sector specific SEZ for\nIT/Hardware/Bio-informatics at Chennai, Tamil Nadu, developed by Ms.\nMahindra World City Developers Ltd., and holder

DAESUNG ELECTRIC INDIA PVT. LTD.,,THIRUVALLUR vs. ACIT (OSD), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 585/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

112, Singadivakkam Chennai – 600 034. Village, Kanchipuram, Tamilnadu – 631 560. [PAN: AAFCM-2148-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) :-3-: ITA. No: 585/Chny/2017, 360/Chny/2018, 40 & 1365/Chny/2019 & IT(TP)A Nos: 2159/Chny/2017, 44 & 45/Chny/2019 Assessee by : Shri. Raghunathan Sampath, Advocate and Shri. S. Sankara Narayanan, Advocate Department by : Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 07.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख

DONG-A INDIA AUTOMOTIVE PVT LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD 1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 360/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

112, Singadivakkam Chennai – 600 034. Village, Kanchipuram, Tamilnadu – 631 560. [PAN: AAFCM-2148-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) :-3-: ITA. No: 585/Chny/2017, 360/Chny/2018, 40 & 1365/Chny/2019 & IT(TP)A Nos: 2159/Chny/2017, 44 & 45/Chny/2019 Assessee by : Shri. Raghunathan Sampath, Advocate and Shri. S. Sankara Narayanan, Advocate Department by : Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 07.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख

KOMOS AUTOMOTIVE INDIA PVT LTD,KANCHIPURAM vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE4(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 2159/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

112, Singadivakkam Chennai – 600 034. Village, Kanchipuram, Tamilnadu – 631 560. [PAN: AAFCM-2148-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) :-3-: ITA. No: 585/Chny/2017, 360/Chny/2018, 40 & 1365/Chny/2019 & IT(TP)A Nos: 2159/Chny/2017, 44 & 45/Chny/2019 Assessee by : Shri. Raghunathan Sampath, Advocate and Shri. S. Sankara Narayanan, Advocate Department by : Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 07.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख