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.

5 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 172(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi425Mumbai417Karnataka254Bangalore133Cochin89Hyderabad89Chennai84Jaipur83Chandigarh73Ahmedabad57Calcutta54Indore48Kolkata44Raipur19Cuttack18Pune16Lucknow12Nagpur11Telangana11Rajkot9Surat7Ranchi6Agra6SC6Dehradun5Varanasi5Rajasthan3Jodhpur2Allahabad2Visakhapatnam1Andhra Pradesh1Guwahati1Kerala1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 153A8Section 54B7Section 143(3)5Section 133(6)5Reassessment4Addition to Income4Search & Seizure4Natural Justice4

SAURABH AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 28/DDN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Chand Upadhyay
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 153A

3. The Ld. AO thus observed that in these bank statements, huge amount aggregating to Rs. 2,00,00,000/- in each of the assessees have been received either from M/s. Sunview Retail Pvt. Ltd. or M/s. Siddheswari Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. However, the same are not appearing anywhere in the balance sheet or profit and loss account except the bank

RUKMAN AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 26/DDN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Chand Upadhyay
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 153A

3. The Ld. AO thus observed that in these bank statements, huge amount aggregating to Rs. 2,00,00,000/- in each of the assessees have been received either from M/s. Sunview Retail Pvt. Ltd. or M/s. Siddheswari Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. However, the same are not appearing anywhere in the balance sheet or profit and loss account except the bank

SHIV KUMAR AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 27/DDN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Chand Upadhyay
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 153A

3. The Ld. AO thus observed that in these bank statements, huge amount aggregating to Rs. 2,00,00,000/- in each of the assessees have been received either from M/s. Sunview Retail Pvt. Ltd. or M/s. Siddheswari Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. However, the same are not appearing anywhere in the balance sheet or profit and loss account except the bank

ABHISHEK AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 29/DDN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Chand Upadhyay
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 153A

3. The Ld. AO thus observed that in these bank statements, huge amount aggregating to Rs. 2,00,00,000/- in each of the assessees have been received either from M/s. Sunview Retail Pvt. Ltd. or M/s. Siddheswari Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. However, the same are not appearing anywhere in the balance sheet or profit and loss account except the bank

SH. DEVENDRA DUTT PANT,HARIDWAR vs. DCIT , UTTARKAHAND

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 149/DDN/2025[2106-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Jan 2026AY 2106-2017

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 54BSection 54E

price at which the land was sold and whether the owner would have ever sold the land valuing it as a property yielding agricultural produce on the basis of its yield? At the risk of repetition, we may mention that not all of these factors would be present or absent in any case and that in each case