BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

320 results for “transfer pricing”+ Unexplained Moneyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai474Delhi320Hyderabad138Jaipur123Chennai111Ahmedabad78Bangalore75Cochin73Rajkot59Chandigarh59Indore54Kolkata48Nagpur34Surat27Pune21Guwahati20Amritsar16Agra15Jodhpur15Raipur11Visakhapatnam11Lucknow11Cuttack7Allahabad2Ranchi1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)87Section 153A87Addition to Income83Section 6877Disallowance41Section 13226Section 153C20Natural Justice19Section 143(2)17

PICO DEEPALI OVERLAYS CONSORTIUM (BY DEEPALI DESIGNS EXHIBITS (P.) LTD.),DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 518/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Pico Deepali Overlays Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-17, Consortium, C/O Mna & Co., Delhi Cas, Suite 444, Tower-B, Spazedge, Sector 47, Sohna Road, Gurgaon – 122 018 Pan :Aabap1880F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144CSection 153ASection 92C

transfer prices. In second round, Ld. AO has merely said that there is no need to vitiate his earlier order since it has not been set aside. In fact, TPO in order dated 27.01.2021 page nos. 73 and 74 of paper books Volume I held that the issues are appearing in order of Ld. DRP regarding TP Report mentions TNMM

PICO DEEPALI OVERLAYS CONSORTIUM,HARYANA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 17, DELHI

In the result, both the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Showing 1–20 of 320 · Page 1 of 16

...
Search & Seizure17
Section 26316
Unexplained Investment15
ITA 412/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Pico Deepali Overlays Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-17, Consortium, C/O Mna & Co., Delhi Cas, Suite 444, Tower-B, Spazedge, Sector 47, Sohna Road, Gurgaon – 122 018 Pan :Aabap1880F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144CSection 153ASection 92C

transfer prices. In second round, Ld. AO has merely said that there is no need to vitiate his earlier order since it has not been set aside. In fact, TPO in order dated 27.01.2021 page nos. 73 and 74 of paper books Volume I held that the issues are appearing in order of Ld. DRP regarding TP Report mentions TNMM

ARIBA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2705/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(3)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

Transfer Pricing adjustment amounting to INR 2,071 in relation to international transaction pertaining to interest on accounts receivable: Ariba India Pvt.Ltd. vs. ACIT 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the AO/ DRP/ TPO erred in making a notional addition of INR 2,071 on account of alleged interest on perceived

MR. MOHAN SAMBHAJI JAGTHAP,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5460/DEL/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Aakash Deep Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Rana, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR
Section 132Section 292CSection 68

unexplained. All the documents related to the remittance of this money have been found in the possession of the assessee. The assessee himself has been instrumental in transferring the money from Kazakhstan to the account of Mrs. Pooja Sharma. All the documents evidencing the operation of routing of monies have been found and seized. Hence, keeping in view the entire

MR. MOHAN SAMBHAJI JAGTHAP,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5462/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Aakash Deep Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Rana, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR
Section 132Section 292CSection 68

unexplained. All the documents related to the remittance of this money have been found in the possession of the assessee. The assessee himself has been instrumental in transferring the money from Kazakhstan to the account of Mrs. Pooja Sharma. All the documents evidencing the operation of routing of monies have been found and seized. Hence, keeping in view the entire

MR. MOHAN SAMBHAJI JAGTHAP,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5461/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Aakash Deep Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Rana, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR
Section 132Section 292CSection 68

unexplained. All the documents related to the remittance of this money have been found in the possession of the assessee. The assessee himself has been instrumental in transferring the money from Kazakhstan to the account of Mrs. Pooja Sharma. All the documents evidencing the operation of routing of monies have been found and seized. Hence, keeping in view the entire

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MOHAN SAMBHAJI JAGTHAP, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6026/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Aakash Deep Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Rana, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR
Section 132Section 292CSection 68

unexplained. All the documents related to the remittance of this money have been found in the possession of the assessee. The assessee himself has been instrumental in transferring the money from Kazakhstan to the account of Mrs. Pooja Sharma. All the documents evidencing the operation of routing of monies have been found and seized. Hence, keeping in view the entire

ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI vs. YASH PAL MENDIRATTA, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1863/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 69

transfer of money for which the AO has made the addition. (v) The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2006) 282 ITR 259 (Madras) has held as under: "The burden of proving actual consideration in such transaction is that of the revenue. The Tribunal had given factual finding and, inter alia, held that

ACIT, CIRCLE CC 15, NEW DELHI vs. ALKA MENDIRATTA , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1864/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 69

transfer of money for which the AO has made the addition. (v) The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2006) 282 ITR 259 (Madras) has held as under: "The burden of proving actual consideration in such transaction is that of the revenue. The Tribunal had given factual finding and, inter alia, held that

GARG ACRYLICS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5214/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mithun Shete, Sr.D.R
Section 116Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 14ASection 153Section 92B

unexplained credits the amounts claimed to have been received by the assessee as Share Application money and Share Premium Money during the year. 5. The appellate crave leave to add, amend, modify, vary, omit or substitute any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. When the matter

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI vs. GARG ACRYLICS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5915/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mithun Shete, Sr.D.R
Section 116Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 14ASection 153Section 92B

unexplained credits the amounts claimed to have been received by the assessee as Share Application money and Share Premium Money during the year. 5. The appellate crave leave to add, amend, modify, vary, omit or substitute any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. When the matter

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI vs. PARMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS P.LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 1330/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI vs. PARAMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 932/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant

DCIT, CC-20, NEW DELHI vs. PARAMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 931/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant

GLOBUS AGROFOODS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 1854/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI vs. PARMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS P.LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 1329/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-20 , DELHI vs. KWALITY TECHMECH PVT. LTD. , DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 937/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant

DCIT, CC-20 , NEW DELHI vs. GLOBUS AGROFOODS PVT.LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 939/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. PARMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS P.LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 933/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. PARMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 934/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

price as Rs.10,000/- per quintal, This results into the addition of Rs.16,51,000/(825.5*2000) on account of undisclosed investment in the stock. 40. Accordingly addition of Rs.l,15,83,000/- is restricted to Rs.16,51,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the relevant