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.

638 results for “section 68”+ Section 144Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai769Delhi638Bangalore287Ahmedabad91Hyderabad69Pune69Kolkata69Chennai50Chandigarh21Jaipur20Dehradun17Indore15Surat9Cuttack6Rajkot6Visakhapatnam5Karnataka4Cochin3Raipur3SC2Amritsar2Jodhpur1Guwahati1Lucknow1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)93Section 144C45Addition to Income45Section 92C30Transfer Pricing30Double Taxation/DTAA27Section 144C(13)24Section 9(1)(vi)22Section 144C(5)17Comparables/TP

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

144C(1) of the Act proceeded to treat the aforesaid sum of Rs.134.99 crores as unexplained credit under section 68

FRESENIUS KABI ONCOLOGY LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-9(3), NEW DELHI

Showing 1–20 of 638 · Page 1 of 32

...
16
Section 153A14
Section 92B13

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 605/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Manish Agarwalfresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd. Income Tax Officer, B-310, Som Dutt Chamber, Ward-9(3), Bhikaji Cama Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110066. Pan-Aabcd7720L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

144C of the Act and therefore, is illegal and liable to be quashed. Fresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd. vs. ITO 3. That the AO/ TPO/ DRP erred on facts and in law in making an adjustment of Rs.105,07,00,000 to the arm's length price of 'international transactions' of sale of APIs and formulations, undertaken by the Appellant with

HOME CREDIT INTERNATIONAL A.S.,CZECH REPUBLIC vs. ASSISTANT. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, GURGAON

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

ITA 2068/DEL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) pertaining to assessment year 2020-21, in pursuance to the directions of learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). AY: 2020-21 2. Though, the assessee has raised multiple grounds, however, at the outset, the assessee has raised a pertinent issue questioning the validity of the final assessment order

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA (P) LTD.

ITA/52/2023HC Delhi02 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

Section 144C of the Act refers to the Dispute Resolution Panel. Sub-section (1) of section 144C provides that in case of an eligible assessee, the Assessing Officer shall notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Act forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment to the assessee if he proposes to make

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.

ITA/995/2019HC Delhi02 Mar 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 144C of the Act refers to the Dispute Resolution Panel. Sub-section (1) of section 144C provides that in case of an eligible assessee, the Assessing Officer shall notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Act forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment to the assessee if he proposes to make

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MICROSOFT INDIA ( R & D) PVT. LTD.

ITA/993/2019HC Delhi02 Mar 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 144C of the Act refers to the Dispute Resolution Panel. Sub-section (1) of section 144C provides that in case of an eligible assessee, the Assessing Officer shall notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Act forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment to the assessee if he proposes to make

DEFSYS SOLUTIONS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1818/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 156Section 271ASection 274

section 143(3) r.w.s 144C of the Act and titled the order as “Assessment order”. 4. While framing the said order, the Assessing Officer concluded the assessment by observing at Para 13 as under: Total Income as per return of income filed 5,68

ROLLS-ROYCE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,DELHI vs. DCIT TP 3(2)(1), DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 252/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Section 144C of the Act on 31.03.2021 in which transfer pricing in adjustment of Rs. 2,19,68,636/- as suggested

SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-22(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 4400/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accontant Member Assessment Year 2020-21 Sumitomo Corporation India Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Circle -22 (2) 501 & 502, 5Th Floor West Wing, World Mark 1, Asset No.11, Hospitality District Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aabcs1887M Appellant Respondent It(Tp) Appeal No.14/Del/2025 Assessment Year 2021-22 Sumitomo Corporation India Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Circle -22 (2) 501 & 502, 5Th Floor Delhi West Wing, World Mark 1, Asset No.11, Hospitality District Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aabcs1887M Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 154Section 80GSection 92C

68,561/- on account of Tax Deducted at Source ('TDS'), Tax Collected at Source ('TCS') and Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA') credit (iv) Erroneous application of surcharge at 12% vis-à-vis surcharge rate of 10% (as provided under section 115BAA of the Act); and (v) Non-computation of interest charged under sections 234A, 234B and 234C

JONES LANG LASALLE PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI, INDIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 13(1), DELHI, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay

ITA 3964/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2020-21 & Stay Application No.61/Del/2025 ( In Ita No. 3964/Del/2024 ) Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: S/Shri Nageshwar Rao and ParthFor Respondent: ShriDharam Veer Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(12)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 41Section 92

Section 144C giving effect to the order of the Honorable DRP on 26.06.2024 vide DIN No. ITBA/COM/F/17/2024/10660567729(1). In the giving effect order the TPO has enhanced the TP adjustment to Rs.369,62,68

COMPAREX INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2151/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

68,496/- instead of INR 1,69,80,644- 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. AO has erred while computing the tax liability for relevant AY by not allowing deduction on account of Section 80G amounting to INR 15,14,475/- already claimed by the Appellant in its Return of Income. Interest and Penalty Grounds

ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), GURUGRAM, GURUGRAM vs. SUNIL KUMAR, GURUGRAM

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

68 cannot be made for loans that were acquired in previous years and are reflected as opening balances. The AO failed to conduct a proper enquiry and the appellant had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate the genuineness and creditworthiness of the lenders.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "143(3)", "144C

JAS FORWARDING WORLDWIDE PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1687/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor advocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 40Section 92CSection 92C(2)

144C(5) of the Act did not consider the facts and merits of Appellant's objections to the proposed adjustments, and merely relied on the reasoning given by the Ld. TPO in his order passed under Section 92CA(3) of the Act and by the Ld. AO in his draft assessment order. On the facts and in the circumstances

JAS FORWARDING WORLDWIDE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2484/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor advocateFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal [CIT] – DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 40Section 92CSection 92C(2)

144C(5) of the Act did not consider the facts and merits of Appellant's objections to the proposed adjustments, and merely relied on the reasoning given by the Ld. TPO in his order passed under Section 92CA(3) of the Act and by the Ld. AO in his draft assessment order. On the facts and in the circumstances

MOBASE INDIA PVT. LTD. ,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ACIT , DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 243/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumara.Y. : 2016-17 Mobase India Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Acit, 1C, Front Part Of Front Building, National E-Assessment Centre, Udyog Vihar, Ecotech-Ii, Greater New Delhi. Noida 201306, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecd 8832 G Assessee By : Sh. Rajesh Dua, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 06.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.02.2024

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Dua, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 2Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43(6)Section 43B

section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 3. The assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2016- 17 on 16/10/2016, declaring a loss of Rs. 5,23,09,629/-. Since the assessee had International Transactions with its Associated Enterprise, the Assessing Officer referred the case to the Transfer Pricing Officer u/s 92CA

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), DELHI vs. ADM AGRO INDUSTRIES KOT & AKOLA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 839/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri R.K. Kapoor, CA
Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 92C

section, the Assessing Officer is mandatorily required to pass draft assessment order before passing final assessment order u/s. 144C(3) of the Act, where no objections are filed by the assessee. The CIT(A) has allowed assessee’s appeal in a well reasoned order following the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Zuari

RAVI KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE INT. TAX 2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 1783/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68Section 8

section 144C of the Income Tax Act 3 Ravi Kumar (i) The Assessing Officer is directed to complete the assessment as per the above directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel. (ii) The Assessing Officer shall place a copy of these directions as annexure to the final order, to be read as a part of the order. (iii) While passing

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

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 753/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 68Section 92Section 92B

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), is illegal and bad in law. 1.1 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in completing the impugned assessment at an income of Rs.207,95,55,288 under normal provisions of the Act against loss of Rs.379,750,658 declared by the appellant in the return of income

DCM SHRIRAM INDUSTRIS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 2166/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagemdra Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(10)Section 14ASection 80Section 92C

section 144C(10) and 144C(13) of the Act. 4. Without prejudice to the above, that the final assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dated 26th July, 2022 is bad in law and the additions/disallowances made by Ld. AO Ld. DRP's are wholly illegal, untenable and on erroneous grounds. GROUNDS OF APPEAL

SABRE MARKETING NEDERLAND, BV,NETHERLANDS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2) INT. TAX., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 381/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: \nMs. Ekta Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

144C(5). Identical issues are involved\nin all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this\ncommon order for the sake of convenience.\nITA No. 410, 7534 & 381\nSabre Marketing Nederland, BV\n2. The facts relevant for assessment year 2015-16 are taken up for\nadjudication and the decision rendered thereon shall apply mutatis