BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

4 results for “transfer pricing”+ Condonation of Delayclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai182Chennai142Delhi125Kolkata87Chandigarh67Hyderabad49Jaipur48Ahmedabad44Bangalore35Pune24Rajkot24Indore13Nagpur10Surat8Cuttack7Cochin6Lucknow5Amritsar5Varanasi5Visakhapatnam4Dehradun4Jodhpur3Agra3Raipur2Patna1

Key Topics

Section 808Section 80I6Section 92C4Section 246A(1)(b)4Section 143(3)4Transfer Pricing4Section 144C2Section 92B2Deduction2

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,SITARGANJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

ITA 24/DDN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pramod Verma, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C

pricing addition of Rs. 78.97 crores; (ii) Secondly, under the approved scheme of amalgamation, the transferee has assumed the liabilities of the transferor company, including tax liabilities; (iii) Thirdly, the consequence of the scheme of amalgamation approved under Section 394 of the Companies Act 1956 is that the amalgamating company ceased to exist. In Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd., the principle

Comparables/TP2

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

ITA 3/DDN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pramod Verma, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C

pricing addition of Rs. 78.97 crores; (ii) Secondly, under the approved scheme of amalgamation, the transferee has assumed the liabilities of the transferor company, including tax liabilities; (iii) Thirdly, the consequence of the scheme of amalgamation approved under Section 394 of the Companies Act 1956 is that the amalgamating company ceased to exist. In Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd., the principle

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. BG EXPLORATION PRODUCDTION INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 105/DDN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 246A(1)(b)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer “TPO” in light of the fact that it had declared its international transaction with related parties in both these assessment years. And that the said latter authority passed his identical orders on 29th January, 2016 and 31st October, 2016 proposing intra-group services and interest payment adjustments involving varying sums. We further note that the Assessing Officer

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. BG EXPLORATION, MUMBAI

ITA 107/DDN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 246A(1)(b)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer “TPO” in light of the fact that it had declared its international transaction with related parties in both these assessment years. And that the said latter authority passed his identical orders on 29th January, 2016 and 31st October, 2016 proposing intra-group services and interest payment adjustments involving varying sums. We further note that the Assessing Officer