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.

172 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 34clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,764 Mumbai2,595 Bangalore1,042 Chennai512 Ahmedabad472 Kolkata442 Hyderabad415 Karnataka374 Jaipur308 Pune303 Surat249 Indore204 Chandigarh190 Cochin172 Rajkot69 SC61 Calcutta60 Visakhapatnam57 Telangana55 Nagpur52 Lucknow51 Raipur50 Cuttack48 Amritsar33 Jodhpur31 Guwahati27 Agra26 Dehradun12 Varanasi11 Rajasthan9 Ranchi8 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN8 Panaji7 Kerala6 Orissa5 Allahabad5 Jabalpur3 Punjab & Haryana2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 DIPAK MISRA V. GOPALA GOWDA1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 Andhra Pradesh1 Patna1 S.B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1 T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 25092 Addition to Income34 Section 143(3)13 Section 80G12 Capital Gains12 Section 2(24)(vi)8 Section 488 Section 92C8 Disallowance8

M/S.IBS SOFTWARE SERVICES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

ITA 601/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 92C

34,83,13,172/- with its Associated Enterprises. The case of the Assessee was referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under Section

Showing 1–20 of 172 · Page 1 of 9

...

Transfer Pricing6

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: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Oct 2024AY 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 234B and 234C of the Act The Appellant craves leave to add to or alter, by deletion, substitution, modification or otherwise, the above grounds of appeal, either before or during the hearing of the appeal.” 3. At the outset, we note that the learned AR for the assessee before us submitted that issue raised by the assessee in ground

SHRI.PRAKASH R. NAIR,KOLLAM vs. DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/COCH/2021[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasprakash R. Nair Dy.Cit, Central Circle Prop. Dhanya Foods Kollam Kochuppilammoodu Vs. Kollam 691001 [Pan:Abfpn4424P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 148(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80Section 801A(9)Section 80HSection 80I

transferring profit to the sister concern/s, which charge is though, both unproved and incidental, on which nothing therefore turns, even as explained in Patel Chemical Works (supra). We may though add that the assessee’s reply should also meet the other incident observations by the AO in the assessment order, noted by us at para 2 (pg. 3) of this

SRI.K.RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 46/COCH/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SMT. T.C. USHA,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 44/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 47/COCH/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 43/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 41/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 42/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 39/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 37/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 48/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 49/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 40/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SMT. T.C. USHA,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 45/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 38/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

transfers to them. (6) In the event of an addition alleging under pricing to sister concerns, corresponding addition in the purchase cost of the latter ought to have been recognized and benefit given in their assessment. Thus, the whole exercise becomes revenue neutral(2010) 236 CTR (SC) 113. Supreme Court decision was misconstrued. (7) Having accepted the trading results filed

M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD,COCHIN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 609/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35Section 43(1)Section 92C

transfer pricing addition of Rs. 9,57,364/- to the income of the Assessee and holding that the international transactions pertaining to provision of corporate IT services do not satisfy the arm's length principle envisaged under the Act. 12.3 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO/Ld. ΤΡΟ grossly erred

THE JT CIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. ALLIANZ CORNHILL INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 185/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

Section 10BSection 144C(5)Section 92C(2)

Section 10A. Therefore, in fact, this order of the Delhi High Court supports the claim of the assessee. In the aforesaid circumstances, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, the questions of law framed have to be answered in favour of the assessee and against revenue. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.” 23 & 185/Coch/2015

M/S.ALLIANZ CORNHILL INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. JTCIT, TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 191/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

Section 10BSection 144C(5)Section 92C(2)

Section 10A. Therefore, in fact, this order of the Delhi High Court supports the claim of the assessee. In the aforesaid circumstances, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, the questions of law framed have to be answered in favour of the assessee and against revenue. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.” 23 & 185/Coch/2015

M/S.NAVIGANT BPM (INDIA) P. LTD(EARLIER KNOWN AS REVENUE MED INDIA P. LTD),TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, ground No.4

ITA 57/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Raghunathan SFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR

Section 10ASection 10BSection 14Section 143(3)Section 144C

Transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.4,12,31,390 as per TPO’s order; and (ii) Disallowance of deduction u/s 10B of the I.T.Act amounting to Rs.1,85,34,036. 3. Against the draft assessment order, the assessee filed objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) u/s 144C(2B) of the I.T.Act. The DRP vide its directions dated 23.11.2015 disposed