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 “depreciation”+ Section 92C(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai382Delhi353Bangalore219Kolkata74Ahmedabad43Chennai39Hyderabad19Pune10Jaipur10Indore5Surat4Guwahati3Cochin2Orissa1Calcutta1Chandigarh1Karnataka1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 92C3Section 92C(3)2Transfer Pricing2Comparables/TP2

UST GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. DCIT,CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed\nfor statistical purpose and the stay application is dismissed as\ninfructuous

ITA 1071/COCH/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Sept 2025AY 2021-22
For Respondent: \nShri Rajakannam, Advocate
Section 143Section 92C

Section 92C(3) of the Act.\n1.2 The Ld. AO/Ld. TPO/Ld. Panel have erred in not\ndemonstrating that the motive of the Appellant was to shift profits\noutside of India by manipulating the prices charged in its\ninternational transactions, which is a pre-requisite condition to\nmake any adjustment under the provision of Chapter

US TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed of statistical purposes

ITA 562/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: Disposed
ITAT Cochin
21 Oct 2024
AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Us Technology International Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle - 1(1) 621, Nila, Technopark Campus 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Kariyavattom, Trivandrum 695581 Kowdiar [Pan: Aaacu5628B] Thiruvananthapuram 695003 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 144C(3)Section 92C(3)

section 92C(3) of the Act, were satisfied in the instant case. Accordingly, the order passed by theTPO is without jurisdiction; 2 US Technology International Pvt. Ltd. 1.3 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned TPO and accordingly, the learned AO erred in not demonstrating that the motive of the Appellant