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 269Tclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai37Indore19Bangalore13Amritsar8Jaipur8Hyderabad8Delhi5Pune4Chandigarh3Ahmedabad2Chennai2Cuttack2Kolkata1Nagpur1Jodhpur1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 1428Section 269S6Section 143(3)5Section 271D3Section 92D3Section 92E3Limitation/Time-bar3Section 269T2Section 271A2Penalty

SONAL TANEJA,NEW DELHI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

ITA 4114/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Varun Taneja, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 273B

price of Rs.6,80,000/- in cash in violation of section 269SS 2 Sonal Taneja r.w. Explanation (iv) inserted in the Act vide Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015. 4. That being the case, the Revenue could hardly dispute that this tribunal’s recent learned co-ordinate bench order in ITO Vs. Shri R. Dhinagharan (HUF) ITA No. 3329/Chny/2019 dated

M/S. UNITECH LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on preliminary ground, appeal of Revenue and its CO are dismissed

2
ITA 6181/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri O.P. Kantआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 6181/Del/2015 With Co No.376/Del/2015 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S.Unitech Limited Dcit, Cir.27(1) 6, Community Centre Vs New Delhi. Saket, New Delhi 17. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Aggarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/05/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27/06/2018 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 144C(4)

section 269SS and 269T), we may submit that except one party we have submitted the full address and PAN of all the accounts/parties mentioned therein except one party i.e. M/s Unibuild Associates, The full details of Unibuild Associates is given hereunder: Unibuild Assocaites A-67, Lajpat Nagar-II, New Delhi II0024 " ADZPG0852E With regards to annexure VIII of Form

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. UNITECH LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on preliminary ground, appeal of Revenue and its CO are dismissed

ITA 6648/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri O.P. Kantआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 6181/Del/2015 With Co No.376/Del/2015 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S.Unitech Limited Dcit, Cir.27(1) 6, Community Centre Vs New Delhi. Saket, New Delhi 17. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Aggarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/05/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27/06/2018 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 144C(4)

section 269SS and 269T), we may submit that except one party we have submitted the full address and PAN of all the accounts/parties mentioned therein except one party i.e. M/s Unibuild Associates, The full details of Unibuild Associates is given hereunder: Unibuild Assocaites A-67, Lajpat Nagar-II, New Delhi II0024 " ADZPG0852E With regards to annexure VIII of Form

JUVALIA SALES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-5, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7201/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar, CIT DR
Section 271Section 271ASection 271BSection 92Section 92BSection 92CSection 92DSection 92E

transfer pricing study was also grossly incomplete. Ld. CIT(A) did not advert to this aspect at all in his order and even before us also Revenue is unable to controvert the same. 11. It could be seen from the record, the admitted facts establish that the assessee filed the income tax return on 30.9.2014, and though the due date

MOHD GULZAR,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 63(5), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4097/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

section 269T of the Act. This clarification by the Board recognizes that a Kachcha Arhtiya— such as the Appellant does not hold funds as a deposit, nor does he act as principal in the sale. He merely acts as a channel through which the goods are routed and payments are facilitated. E. It is submitted that Assessee is acting