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.

3,880 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 9(1)(v)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,880Mumbai3,514Bangalore1,625Chennai886Kolkata675Ahmedabad643Hyderabad507Karnataka448Jaipur393Pune359Chandigarh252Indore227Cochin198Surat143Visakhapatnam115Rajkot108SC99Nagpur73Telangana73Cuttack65Calcutta65Lucknow63Raipur47Amritsar34Guwahati31Jodhpur29Agra29Dehradun28A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN15Ranchi13Varanasi12Allahabad11Rajasthan10Kerala9Panaji7Patna6Jabalpur6Orissa6Punjab & Haryana3DIPAK MISRA V. GOPALA GOWDA1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1S.B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Addition to Income64Section 143(3)43Section 6831Transfer Pricing24Section 153A23Section 144C22Section 14819Disallowance19Section 92C18

MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), MEERUT

In the result, the additional Ground No

ITA 2313/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 153(3)Section 270ASection 35Section 80GSection 80I

v t . ( b l a n k ) K G 7 0 9 . 7 9 2 3 4 2 3 0 . 7 0 3 3 0 3 3 0 3 3 0 F o i l 0 . 1 3 x 2 4 8 Mm 2 1 9 8 L t d . 2 0 0 0 7 7 9 1

Showing 1–20 of 3,880 · Page 1 of 194

...
Section 14A17
Double Taxation/DTAA17
Section 14316

MR. SANJEEV GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ground No. 3 and 4 With respect to the disallowance of export commission of the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3366/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishisanjeev Gupta, Vs. Addl. Cit, E-31, Kamla Nagar, Range-20, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Ahcpg7326A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Satish Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 5(2)(b)Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

price for the GK 3 project equal to: ( 4.10% of the FOB Mill value in U.S. Dollar for i the quantity shipped is last (18") Shipment. ) ( GLOBAL SYNERGY INTERNATIONAL LTD agrees a to unconditionally to fulfill the scope set therein ) by the virtue of this addendum. ( This commission is over the above the b commission payable by Welspun to Global

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

ITA/16/2014HC Delhi16 Mar 2015

Sections (1) and (2) to Section 92C are applicable to the assessed, as well as the Assessing Officer invoking power under Sub-Section (3) to Section 92C of the Act. As noted above, sub-section (2) to Section 92C stipulates that most appropriate method, out of the methods specified in sub-section (1) shall be applied to determine

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 92BSection 92CSection 92E

9 of 20 referred to the amendment introduced by the Finance Act, 2011. By virtue of which sub-section (2A) was inserted in Section 92CA with effect from 01.06.2011. He submitted that upon a plain construction of the newly inserted sub-section (2A), it is apparent that Parliament intended to widen the jurisdiction of the Transfer Pricing Officer

ASIA SATELLITE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO. LTD. vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA-131/2003HC Delhi31 Jan 2011
Section 195Section 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)Section 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

9. Thus if the transaction is one of leasing/hiring/letting simpliciter under which the possession of the goods, i.e., effective and general control of the goods is to be given to the customer and the customer has the freedom and choice of selecting the manner, time and nature of use and enjoyment, though within the frame work of the agreement, then

PCIT-1, NEW DELHI vs. BEAM GLOBAL SPIRITS & WINE (INDIA)PVT.LTD.

ITA/155/2022HC Delhi07 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 92BSection 92F

1) thus is explicit that the only manner of effecting a transfer pricing adjustment is to substitute the transaction price with the arm's length price so determined. The second proviso to section 92C(2) provides a "gateway" by stipulating that if the variation between the arm's length price and the transaction price does not exceed the specified percentage

PCIT-1, NEW DELHI vs. BEAM GLOBAL SPIRITS & WINE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

ITA/156/2022HC Delhi07 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 92BSection 92F

1) thus is explicit that the only manner of effecting a transfer pricing adjustment is to substitute the transaction price with the arm's length price so determined. The second proviso to section 92C(2) provides a "gateway" by stipulating that if the variation between the arm's length price and the transaction price does not exceed the specified percentage

MGB METRO GROUP BUYING HK LTD- INDIA LIASION OFFICE,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1473/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2001-02 M/S. Parpool Ltd., Vs. Adit, C/O- Mgb Metro Group International Taxation, Buying Hk Ltd. - India Circle -1(2), New Delhi Liaison Office, 40, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm3289J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos.4911/Del/2010 & 1473/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Mgb Metro Group Vs. Dit, Buying Hk Ltd., Circle-3(1), International India Liaison Officer, 40, Taxation, Drum Shape Okhla Industrial Estate, Building, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm3289J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 234BSection 5Section 9

transfer / information sharing with suppliers, and portal maintenance; and • Developing international standards for occupational training in retail sector and offering on-line tailored training courses and programs.” 6.3.9 Regarding the activities undertaken by the LO, the ld. counsel submitted as under: “2.8. Activities undertaken by LO in India The activities undertaken by the LO are limited to: • Collecting and supply

PARPOOL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1472/DEL/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2001-02 M/S. Parpool Ltd., Vs. Adit, C/O- Mgb Metro Group International Taxation, Buying Hk Ltd. - India Circle -1(2), New Delhi Liaison Office, 40, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm3289J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos.4911/Del/2010 & 1473/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Mgb Metro Group Vs. Dit, Buying Hk Ltd., Circle-3(1), International India Liaison Officer, 40, Taxation, Drum Shape Okhla Industrial Estate, Building, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm3289J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 234BSection 5Section 9

transfer / information sharing with suppliers, and portal maintenance; and • Developing international standards for occupational training in retail sector and offering on-line tailored training courses and programs.” 6.3.9 Regarding the activities undertaken by the LO, the ld. counsel submitted as under: “2.8. Activities undertaken by LO in India The activities undertaken by the LO are limited to: • Collecting and supply

MGB METRO GROUP BUYING HK LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 4911/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2001-02 M/S. Parpool Ltd., Vs. Adit, C/O- Mgb Metro Group International Taxation, Buying Hk Ltd. - India Circle -1(2), New Delhi Liaison Office, 40, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm3289J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos.4911/Del/2010 & 1473/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Mgb Metro Group Vs. Dit, Buying Hk Ltd., Circle-3(1), International India Liaison Officer, 40, Taxation, Drum Shape Okhla Industrial Estate, Building, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm3289J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 234BSection 5Section 9

transfer / information sharing with suppliers, and portal maintenance; and • Developing international standards for occupational training in retail sector and offering on-line tailored training courses and programs.” 6.3.9 Regarding the activities undertaken by the LO, the ld. counsel submitted as under: “2.8. Activities undertaken by LO in India The activities undertaken by the LO are limited to: • Collecting and supply

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. NEW SKIES SATELLITE BV

Accordingly answered against the Revenue. The appeals fail and are dismissed, without

ITA/473/2012HC Delhi08 Feb 2016

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 260ASection 9(1)(vi)

transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of a licence) in respect of any copyright, literary, artistic or scientific work including films or video tapes for use in connection with ITA 473/2012, 474/2012, 500/2012 & 244/2014 Page 8 television or tapes for use in connection with radio broadcasting, but not including consideration for the sale, distribution or exhibition

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX DELHI vs. M/S LUFTHANSA CARGO INDIA P .

ITA/95/2005HC Delhi27 May 2015

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

Section 195Section 260ASection 9(1)(vii)

v. ITO 371 ITR 453. Explaining the interplay between Section 9(1)(vii) and the amendment made by Finance Act, 2007 and Finance Act, 2010 resulting in retrospective insertion of Explanation to Section 9(2) of the Act, the Court clarified that the exception provided in terms of clause (b) to Section 9(1)(vii) was not overridden by insertion

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX DELHI vs. M/S LUFTHANSA CARGO INDIA P .

ITA - 95 / 2005HC Delhi27 May 2015
Section 195Section 260ASection 9(1)(vii)

v. ITO 371 ITR 453. Explaining the interplay between Section 9(1)(vii) and the amendment made by Finance Act, 2007 and Finance Act, 2010 resulting in retrospective insertion of Explanation to Section 9(2) of the Act, the Court clarified that the exception provided in terms of clause (b) to Section 9(1)(vii) was not overridden by insertion

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1) vs. SYSTEM AMERICA INDIA LTD.,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1492/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 195Section 234BSection 250Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 80

v) That the learned AO, while computing the deduction u/s 80HHE as per the directions of the Ld. CIT(A), has erred in excluding the sum of Rs. 3,98,27,529/- as payment not realized within the prescribed period, ignoring the fact that the extension of the same was granted by the bank of the assessee

SYSTEMS AMERICA (INDIA) LTD. vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Department is dismissed

ITA 905/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 195Section 234BSection 250Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 80

v) That the learned AO, while computing the deduction u/s 80HHE as per the directions of the Ld. CIT(A), has erred in excluding the sum of Rs. 3,98,27,529/- as payment not realized within the prescribed period, ignoring the fact that the extension of the same was granted by the bank of the assessee

ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI vs. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4076/DEL/2012[2008-09 (F.Y. 2007-08)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

9(l)(vii) did not apply. Tribunal has rightly dismissed the appeal after taking into consideration the agreement between the assessee and T and the nature of services provided by T to the assessee. It was a simple case of payment for the provision of a bandwidth. No technical services were rendered by T to the assessee. On a consideration

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3594/DEL/2012[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

9(l)(vii) did not apply. Tribunal has rightly dismissed the appeal after taking into consideration the agreement between the assessee and T and the nature of services provided by T to the assessee. It was a simple case of payment for the provision of a bandwidth. No technical services were rendered by T to the assessee. On a consideration

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3595/DEL/2012[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

9(l)(vii) did not apply. Tribunal has rightly dismissed the appeal after taking into consideration the agreement between the assessee and T and the nature of services provided by T to the assessee. It was a simple case of payment for the provision of a bandwidth. No technical services were rendered by T to the assessee. On a consideration

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 3596/DEL/2012[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

9(l)(vii) did not apply. Tribunal has rightly dismissed the appeal after taking into consideration the agreement between the assessee and T and the nature of services provided by T to the assessee. It was a simple case of payment for the provision of a bandwidth. No technical services were rendered by T to the assessee. On a consideration

ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI vs. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4077/DEL/2012[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT(DR)
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

9(l)(vii) did not apply. Tribunal has rightly dismissed the appeal after taking into consideration the agreement between the assessee and T and the nature of services provided by T to the assessee. It was a simple case of payment for the provision of a bandwidth. No technical services were rendered by T to the assessee. On a consideration