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.

1,127 results for “transfer pricing”+ Carry Forward of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,549Delhi1,127Kolkata499Bangalore421Ahmedabad399Pune340Chennai232Jaipur210Karnataka207Chandigarh154Hyderabad119Cochin108Indore79Visakhapatnam73Rajkot72Surat63Nagpur42Raipur39Calcutta38Lucknow34Amritsar27Guwahati24Cuttack22SC17Telangana16Varanasi10Jodhpur9Agra7Jabalpur7Ranchi7Panaji5Dehradun4Kerala3Rajasthan2D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Allahabad1Punjab & Haryana1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)45Addition to Income45Section 92C30Disallowance26Transfer Pricing25Comparables/TP21Deduction21Section 6819Section 14718

NOBLE RESOURCE & TRADING INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed with above direction

ITA 1827/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Chawla, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Chaudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 92C

carry forward business losses. Total income was computed at Rs. 67691440/–. Assessee preferred objections before the learned Dispute Resolution Panel, who passed direction on 26/12/2013. Based on those directions, order u/s 143 (3) was passed wherein „business support service‟ segment adjustment was determined at Rs. 10731404/– and „export and import of chemical segment‟ adjustment was made of Rs. 67428360/-. Total

NOBLE RESOURCES & TRADING INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Showing 1–20 of 1,127 · Page 1 of 57

...
Section 144C16
Section 80I15
Section 194H15

The appeal is allowed with above direction

ITA 1847/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Chawla, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Chaudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 92C

carry forward business losses. Total income was computed at Rs. 67691440/–. Assessee preferred objections before the learned Dispute Resolution Panel, who passed direction on 26/12/2013. Based on those directions, order u/s 143 (3) was passed wherein „business support service‟ segment adjustment was determined at Rs. 10731404/– and „export and import of chemical segment‟ adjustment was made of Rs. 67428360/-. Total

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BBC WORLD INDIA (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee and the learned assessing officer are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5556/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 250Section 92C

loss. (v) Any agreement containing any kind of riders cannot be so sacrosanct so as to justify the Arm's Length nature of any international transaction. Hence just by entering into an agreement a transaction cannot escape the purview of scrutiny on the ground of law.” 46. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 5441/Del/2014

DCM SHRIIRAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 3 , NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7362/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, C. A.; &For Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal [CIT] – DR
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 92C

carried out by the independent valuers. The Ld DRP/AO have thus erred in law in not entertaining the claim of the assessee that stamp valuation exceeds the fair market value of such lands arrived on the basis of said independent valuation and hence no addition should be made u/s 50C of the Act. 5.3 The Id AO has erred

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

ITA/16/2014HC Delhi16 Mar 2015

forwarding and clearing expenses 3,569,537 17 Misc. Expenses 3,960,471 18 Sales incentive expenses 2,869,355 19 Warehouse running and maintenance expenses 28,795,393 20 IITTF trade fair stall expenses 1,810,963 21 Store general Merchandising 8,400,943 Total 166,12,066 21. Referring to the judgment in LG Electronics India

LIUGONG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1482/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Manoj Pardasani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amrendra Kumar, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

price to mean a price "which is applied or proposed to be applied in a transaction between persons other than associated enterprises in uncontrolled conditions". Since the reference is to "price" and to "uncontrolled conditions" it implicitly brings into play the bright line test. In other words, it emphasises that where the price is something other than what would

LI & FUNG INDIA PVT LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed and the order dated 25/11/11 of the ITAT Tribunal, Delhi Branch

ITA/306/2012HC Delhi16 Dec 2013

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 260ASection 92C

Loss Account. After taking into account this gross income, the net operating income is computed at Rs.601,480,000. Thus, the arm‟s length price is calculated as below: Net Operating income (as calculated above) Rs.601,480,000 Operating income shown by assessee Rs.24,918,814 Difference Rs.576,561,186 Accordingly, the value of the international transaction of the assessee

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

loss account of the units was filed along with the return of income. The net profits of the units were computed by (i) reducing actual direct expenses incurred at respective units; and (ii) allocating and apportioning common expenses debited at head office/research center, based on sales.During the course of the assessment, the ld. AO specifically directed the appellant to justify

STERIA (INDIA) LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, SPL. RANGE- 8 , NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 5745/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

transfer price legislation. 3.3.2(2) For determining Top-up invoice: “Revenue" is defined as inclusive of (a) Revenue as per clause 3.3.1 (b) Foreign exchange currency gain/loss if any (c) Other income earned out of regular business operations and (d) Top-up value to arrive at agreed return. Non-operational and other income, if any will be excluded for determining

STERIA INDIA LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAQL RANGE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 3992/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

transfer price legislation. 3.3.2(2) For determining Top-up invoice: “Revenue" is defined as inclusive of (a) Revenue as per clause 3.3.1 (b) Foreign exchange currency gain/loss if any (c) Other income earned out of regular business operations and (d) Top-up value to arrive at agreed return. Non-operational and other income, if any will be excluded for determining

M/S STERIA NDIA LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ADDL CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 741/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

transfer price legislation. 3.3.2(2) For determining Top-up invoice: “Revenue" is defined as inclusive of (a) Revenue as per clause 3.3.1 (b) Foreign exchange currency gain/loss if any (c) Other income earned out of regular business operations and (d) Top-up value to arrive at agreed return. Non-operational and other income, if any will be excluded for determining

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)

forwarded to the assessee on 28/12/2011. 25. Assessee aggrieved with the above order preferred objection before the Dispute Resolution Panel – 1, New Delhi who passed the direction under section 144C (5) of the Income Tax Act 1961 on 3/9/2012. The learned Dispute Resolution Panel with respect to the objection on account of international transaction on export of goods

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.,HISAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6337/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

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

forwarded to the assessee on 28/12/2011. 25. Assessee aggrieved with the above order preferred objection before the Dispute Resolution Panel – 1, New Delhi who passed the direction under section 144C (5) of the Income Tax Act 1961 on 3/9/2012. The learned Dispute Resolution Panel with respect to the objection on account of international transaction on export of goods

M/S. SIS LIVE,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result the ground No

ITA 1313/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishisis Live Acit, C/O. Srbc & Associates Llp, Central Circle-17, Room No. Vs. Golf View Corporate Tower B, 356, E-2, Sector-42, Sector Road, Gurgaon Pan:Abrfs4787L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri NC Swain, CIT DR (OSD)
Section 142(1)

carried away by the Shunglu Committee Report. He submitted that Shunglu Committee Report was made without giving an opportunity of hearing to the assessee and, further, the AO ignored the fact that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had already filed a closure report in the criminal cases arising out of Shunglu Committee report and such closure report was accepted

SH. EVALUESERVE.COM PRIVATE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 8 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4001/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishievalueserve.Com Private Vs. Ito, Ltd, Ward-11(2), 701, Guru Apartments, New Delhi Sector-14, Rohni, New Delhi Pan: Aaace8014F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: i. Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv ii. Sh. Sumit Lal ChandaniFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)(ii)Section 234BSection 271Section 92Section 92C

forward losses from assessment year 2002 – 03 of Rs. 9508868/– before granting deduction under section 10 A of the income tax act. Consequently he reduced the deduction under section 10 A of the income tax act by Rs. 9508868/–. The transfer pricing adjustment of Rs. 162401920/– was also retained. Therefore, aggrieved by the order of the Ld. assessing officer assessee

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)

forwarding segment of the assessee. There is no dispute on the functional profile of the assessee, most appropriate method adopted by the assessee and the margins of the assessee. The learned transfer pricing officer has objected to the adoption of the multiple year data to which assessee does not have an objection now. The only objection is with respect

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)

forwarding segment of the assessee. There is no dispute on the functional profile of the assessee, most appropriate method adopted by the assessee and the margins of the assessee. The learned transfer pricing officer has objected to the adoption of the multiple year data to which assessee does not have an objection now. The only objection is with respect

HUMBOLDT WEDAG INDIA PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA 3207/Del/2016 stands allowed

ITA 3207/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Verma, CA
Section 143(1)Section 154(3)Section 92C

forward that had the assessee taken such services from a third party, it would have charged a mark-up for such services. Hence, on reasonable facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble DRP erred in giving direction for adjustment to the extent of mark-up charged by the AE for providing intra-group services. 7. Without prejudice to all the above

HUMBOLDT WEDAG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA 3207/Del/2016 stands allowed

ITA 1154/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Verma, CA
Section 143(1)Section 154(3)Section 92C

forward that had the assessee taken such services from a third party, it would have charged a mark-up for such services. Hence, on reasonable facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble DRP erred in giving direction for adjustment to the extent of mark-up charged by the AE for providing intra-group services. 7. Without prejudice to all the above

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HUMBOLDT WEDAG INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result ITA 3207/Del/2016 stands allowed

ITA 1057/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Verma, CA
Section 143(1)Section 154(3)Section 92C

forward that had the assessee taken such services from a third party, it would have charged a mark-up for such services. Hence, on reasonable facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble DRP erred in giving direction for adjustment to the extent of mark-up charged by the AE for providing intra-group services. 7. Without prejudice to all the above