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.

122 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 80clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,020Delhi1,888Bangalore735Karnataka500Chennai442Ahmedabad441Kolkata347Hyderabad291Pune286Jaipur242Surat216Chandigarh174Indore141Cochin122Calcutta59Visakhapatnam51Raipur46Rajkot42Telangana40Cuttack39SC37Lucknow32Nagpur29Agra23Guwahati22Jodhpur21Amritsar19Ranchi10Dehradun9Varanasi5Rajasthan5Allahabad4Panaji3Orissa2Jabalpur2Kerala2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1Patna1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 25095Addition to Income41Section 144C(5)15Section 153A15Section 13213Disallowance12Section 143(3)11Section 2638Section 14A8

APPLEXUS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT, KOTTAYAM

ITA 955/COCH/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2025AY 2021-2022
For Appellant: Shri Reuben JosephFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

Section 92C(3) of the Act supported the contention of the Assessee that the TP documentation of the Assessee was rejected without appreciating the documents/submissions filed by the Assessee. 6.1. It was submitted that segmental information was submitted before the TPO alongwith Response, dated 20/09/2023, whereby it was explained/clarified by the Assessee as under: (a) The basis of segmenting each

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

Showing 1–20 of 122 · Page 1 of 7

Transfer Pricing8
Exemption8
Section 133A7

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

section 801A(9); iv. Deduction under sec. 80HHC was re-worked; v. Addition on account of under-pricing of sales of cashew kernels to sister concerns in the course of exports (Rs. 3,21,15,027/-) The foregoing constitute the primary, undisputed facts of the case. 3.1 In the penalty proceedings, which were though considered only in respect of addition

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

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

transfer prices. For example when price of say W320 grade contracted earlier was Rs. X which is less than cost or current price, assessee is bound to sell atcontracted price only. It was submitted that A.O. wrongly presumed that entire sales in India were to sister concerns. The sales wereeffected in the domestic market through depots, consignment agents

THE ACIT, CIR-1(1), KOCHI, KOCHI vs. SRI.PRINCE JOSEPH, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 272/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.BindhuFor Respondent: Sri.Mathew Joseph
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(47)

price agreed was paid while in the this case, 80% of the sale consideration have been paid. 4. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the fact that the AO established implied handing over of possession in the assessment order. The sale consideration received by the assessee has not been refunded to the buyer. The CIT(A) has ignored the arguments

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 Officer (TPO) u/s. 92CA(1) of the Act for the purpose of benchmarking the above international transactions. The TPO vide order dated 28.10.2016 3 Apollo Tyres Ltd. passed u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act suggested upward TP adjustments in respect of corporate guarantee commission provided to Apollo Vredestein BV (AVBV

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)

transfer pricing policy of the Assessee. 3 Determination of arm's length price by the TPO in relation to the ‘Software Development Services’ segment • The TPO erred in law in not rejecting certain companies originally selected as comparables in the TP study even though the underlying functional/ business profile of those companies squarely disqualified them being comparables. 3 & 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)

transfer pricing policy of the Assessee. 3 Determination of arm's length price by the TPO in relation to the ‘Software Development Services’ segment • The TPO erred in law in not rejecting certain companies originally selected as comparables in the TP study even though the underlying functional/ business profile of those companies squarely disqualified them being comparables. 3 & 185/Coch/2015

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 475/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 May 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sri.Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 144C(5)Section 190Section 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 92C(3)

section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act, as it was considered retrospective effect by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Export Company (supra). Accordingly, this issue is remitted to the file of A.O. for fresh consideration. 14. As regards ground No.6 and its sub-grounds, the grievance of the assessee is that the Transfer Pricing Officer