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.

2 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 269Tclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai37Indore19Bangalore13Hyderabad8Jaipur8Amritsar8Delhi5Chandigarh3Ahmedabad2Chennai2Cuttack2Kolkata1Jodhpur1Nagpur1Pune1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 271D2Section 271E2Section 234A2Section 1322Section 153A2Penalty2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

C.KISHANLAL,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), CHENNAI

ITA 2928/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2928, 2929, 2930 & 2931/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2006-07, 2006-07, 2006-07, 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, PCIT
Section 132Section 153ASection 234ASection 271DSection 271E

transferred on the very same date to assessee’s account. There was no source shown for the deposits in the bank account. (v) Smt. V. Suvitha "9,00,000/- - Smt. V. Suvitha, daughter-in- law of the assessee, though she had confirmed that she had given "9,00,000/- to the assessee, she was only a ITA Nos.2928 to 2932/17

KISHANLAL & SONS (HUF),CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), CHENNAI

ITA 2932/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2928, 2929, 2930 & 2931/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2006-07, 2006-07, 2006-07, 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, PCIT
Section 132Section 153ASection 234ASection 271DSection 271E

transferred on the very same date to assessee’s account. There was no source shown for the deposits in the bank account. (v) Smt. V. Suvitha "9,00,000/- - Smt. V. Suvitha, daughter-in- law of the assessee, though she had confirmed that she had given "9,00,000/- to the assessee, she was only a ITA Nos.2928 to 2932/17