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.

22 results for “reassessment”+ Section 92Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai45Delhi22Ahmedabad16Bangalore11Chennai8Kolkata7Hyderabad5Jaipur2Karnataka2Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)19Addition to Income17Section 14713Transfer Pricing13Section 92C11Section 144C9Section 14A7Double Taxation/DTAA7Limitation/Time-bar6

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

ITA/16/2014HC Delhi16 Mar 2015

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year, proceedings for which have been completed before the 1st day of July, 2012. *Inserted by the Finance Act, 2002, w.e.f. 1-6-2002. *** Inserted by the Finance

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. AMADEUS INDIA PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/938/2011HC Delhi28 Nov 2011
For Appellant: Ms Suruchi AggarwalFor Respondent: Mr M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate with Mr Mayank Nagi &
Section 144CSection 260ASection 92B

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

Disallowance5
Permanent Establishment5
Comparables/TP4
Section 92C
Section 92E

reassessment or recomputation or fresh assessment, as the case may be, expires.] [(4) On receipt of the order under sub-section (3), the Assessing Officer shall proceed to compute the total income of the assessee under sub-section (4) of section 92C in conformity with the arm’s length price as so determined by the Transfer Pricing Officer.] xxxx xxxx

M/S. LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 1946/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

Section PB-II Reference AO M.B.Shin 133A 660 p.21 YashovardhanVerma 133A 665 H.C.Moon 133A 671 Jae Gyu Cho 133A 677 Woody Nam 133A 680 p.20,22,24,29,33 H.D.Rew 133A 693 H.D.Rew 131 696 p.21,39 Soonkwang 131 699 JAE Hyun Lee 131 701 Mong Nam Jung 131 704 p.36,41 BeomSeok Kang 131 707 Umesh Kumar Dhal

LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- NOIDA, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 6916/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

Section PB-II Reference AO M.B.Shin 133A 660 p.21 YashovardhanVerma 133A 665 H.C.Moon 133A 671 Jae Gyu Cho 133A 677 Woody Nam 133A 680 p.20,22,24,29,33 H.D.Rew 133A 693 H.D.Rew 131 696 p.21,39 Soonkwang 131 699 JAE Hyun Lee 131 701 Mong Nam Jung 131 704 p.36,41 BeomSeok Kang 131 707 Umesh Kumar Dhal

LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 3327/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

Section PB-II Reference AO M.B.Shin 133A 660 p.21 YashovardhanVerma 133A 665 H.C.Moon 133A 671 Jae Gyu Cho 133A 677 Woody Nam 133A 680 p.20,22,24,29,33 H.D.Rew 133A 693 H.D.Rew 131 696 p.21,39 Soonkwang 131 699 JAE Hyun Lee 131 701 Mong Nam Jung 131 704 p.36,41 BeomSeok Kang 131 707 Umesh Kumar Dhal

M/S BMW INDIA PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1514/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2011-12] Bmw India Private Ltd. Vs. The Dy. Dcit 7Th Floor, Tower-B, Building Circle-1(1) No. 8, Dlf Cyber City, Phase Gurgaon Ii, Gurgaon Pan:Aabcb7140C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv Shri Divyanshu Agarwal, Adv Department By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 92B(1)Section 92F

92B read with Section 92F (v), an international transaction could include an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, this cannot be a matter of inference. There has to be some tangible evidence on record to show that two parties have “acted in concert”. XXX 37. The provisions under Chapter X do envisage a ‘separate entity concept’. In other words, there

SUPERBRANDS LTD (UK),GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 332/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.332/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Superbrands Ltd. (Uk) Dcit C/O Bdo India Llp 1501-1508, Vs. Circle 3(1)(2), Palm Spring Plaza, Sector-54, International Taxation, Golf Course Road, Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana. Pan No. Aaics6497G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(3)

92B. a reference is made to the TPO under sub-Section (1) of Section 92CA of the Act. Though the provision does not state as to when a reference is to be made, a reading of section 153 would explicit that the reference is to be made during the course of the assessment proceedings before the expiry of the period

SUPER BRANDS LTD (UK),NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are disposed of as

ITA 3115/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR

92B, a reference is made to the TPO under sub-Section (1) of Section 92CA of the Act. Though the provision does not state as to when a reference is to be made, a reading of section 153 would explicit that the reference is to be made during the course of the assessment proceedings before the expiry of the period

M/S. SUPERBRANDS LIMITED (UK),NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are disposed of as

ITA 654/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR

92B, a reference is made to the TPO under sub-Section (1) of Section 92CA of the Act. Though the provision does not state as to when a reference is to be made, a reading of section 153 would explicit that the reference is to be made during the course of the assessment proceedings before the expiry of the period

M/S RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

92B of the Act, (―eligible assessee‘) the assessing officer is required to make a reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer (―TPO‖) to determine the arm‘s length price (―ALP‖) in respect of such international transactions. In case of such an eligible assessee, (as also defined in sub- section 15(b) of section 144C of the Act), the assessing officer

RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1763/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

92B of the Act, (―eligible assessee‘) the assessing officer is required to make a reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer (―TPO‖) to determine the arm‘s length price (―ALP‖) in respect of such international transactions. In case of such an eligible assessee, (as also defined in sub- section 15(b) of section 144C of the Act), the assessing officer

PIONEER INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2969/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 92C

reassessments- (1) No order of assessment shall be made under section 143 or section 144 at any time after the expiry of - 11 Pioneer India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (a) Two years from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable, or (b) One year from the end of the financial year in which a return

HAIER APPLIANCES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, IT & TP DELHI 2(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 417/DEL/2022[2017-148]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2017-148

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254Section 92BSection 92F

92B read with Section 92F(v) of the Act; 8. The TPO /AO erred on facts and in law by determining arm's length price on account of AMP expenses in the absence of any machinery provisions in Chapter X of the Act which are applicable to AMP expense. 9. The TPO /AO erred on facts

BMW INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1406/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11 Bmw India Private Ltd. Vs. Dcit 7Th Floor, Tower-B, Building Circle-1(1) No. 8, Dlf Cyber City, Phase Gurgaon Ii, Gurgaon Pan:Aabcb7140C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv Department By : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 Order Per R.S. Syal, Vp: This Appeal By The Assessee Emanates From The Final Assessment Order Dated 24.02.2015 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144 C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Sh. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 92B(1)Section 92F

92B(2) and held that even if it was a transaction between two Indian companies, it will still be an international transaction. The Tribunal held that there was no international transaction. Even on merits, it was held that the TPO determined the ALP by a method not prescribed u/s 92C and hence no addition was called for. When the matter

HITACHI HIGH- TECHNOLOGIES (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2683/DEL/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Puri, PCIT, Udaipur
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 234A

reassessment proceedings, by holding that the foreign company did not have any right to use premises or any fixed place at its disposal in India and, thus, right to use test or disposal test was not satisfied for holding that it had a PE in India in terms of article 5(1). Further, even though the foreign company was authorized

VEDANTA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 9495/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Kr. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 32

92B(1) of the Act and hence outside purview of transfer pricing provisions. 10.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. AO/TPO/DRP erred in not appreciating that as prescribed in 5 Vedanta Ltd. Production Sharing Contract/Petroleum Resource Agreement / Joint Operating Agreement, partners of Unincorporated Joint Venture (UJV) are permissible to pay only for actual

CIT vs. CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA - 475 / 2012HC Delhi23 May 2014
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92BSection 92C

92B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). Of these, two are important in the present proceedings: payment of referral fee of ₹ 1,73,26,631/- by the assessee to several foreign AEs for referring clients, and ₹ 1,06,39,865/- as reimbursement to CWS and CWHK for costs incurred by them for certain coordination and liaison services

LT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6221/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT- DR
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 92C

Section 92B of the Act of the expression “receivables'' does not mean that de hors the context every item of “receivables'' appearing in the accounts of an entity, which may have dealings with foreign AEs would automatically be characterised as an international transaction. There may be a delay in collection of monies for supplies made, even beyond the agreed limit

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, we direct the AO to reduce the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act by the amount of reversal of the provision of Rs

ITA 196/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I. C.Sudhir Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishia.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Acit 12Th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacr0127N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: 1. Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92D

92B and rule 10B redundant. This is patently an unacceptable position having no sanction of the Indian transfer pricing law. Borrowing a contrary mandate of the TP provisions of other countries and reading it into our provisions is not permissible. The requirement under our law is to compute the income from an international transaction between two AEs having regard

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JSL LTD.,, HISAR

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4110/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

Section 92(4) of the Act). 137. The question of aggregation and disaggregation of transactions when the TNM Method or even in other methods is sought to be applied, must have reference to the strength and weaknesses of the TNM Method or the applicable method. Aggregation of transactions is desirable and not merely permissible, if the nature of transaction