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.

144 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 48clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,164Mumbai2,060Bangalore827Ahmedabad410Chennai389Kolkata374Karnataka345Hyderabad309Jaipur309Pune222Chandigarh181Indore179Cochin144Surat116Rajkot60Calcutta57Visakhapatnam54Lucknow50Nagpur42SC41Telangana40Raipur38Agra29Amritsar27Cuttack23Guwahati22Jodhpur17Ranchi11Varanasi10Rajasthan8Allahabad7Panaji6Jabalpur6Kerala5Dehradun4Orissa3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Patna2Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 25094Addition to Income37Section 143(3)25Capital Gains16Section 80G12Section 1329Section 153A9Section 2(24)(vi)8Section 488Section 92C

APOLLO TYRES LTD.,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIR 1(1), KOCHI

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

ITA 679/COCH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2020-21 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Acit, 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: 10.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 35Section 92C

48,130/- to the income of the Appellant and erred in holding that the international transactions pertaining to provision of software development services do not satisfy the arm's length principle envisaged under the Act. b. That the Ld. TPO/AO/DRP erred in adopting and applying filters of current year data, companies having different financial year ending, service income

Showing 1–20 of 144 · Page 1 of 8

...
7
Business Income6
Exemption5

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 31/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 310/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 306/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 28/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 308/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 35/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 309/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 29/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 304/COCH/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 33/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 34/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 30/COCH/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 305/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SMT.GRACY BABU, ADOOR P.O.

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 54/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 238/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 213/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 210/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

THE ACIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SMT.GRACY BABU, ADOOR P.O.

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 239/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case

THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 55/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

48 on the transfer and charging the same u/s. 45, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Sreenivasa Shetty (128 ITR 294) wherein it was held that if the cost of acquisition of the asset transferred is indeterminable no capital gains can be computed. In the assessee’s case