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 results for “transfer pricing”+ Deemed Dividendclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai938Delhi508Kolkata190Bangalore188Ahmedabad149Chennai135Hyderabad103Chandigarh96Cochin80Pune63Jaipur45Raipur31Indore25Lucknow22Calcutta17Surat15SC13Agra9Karnataka9Visakhapatnam8Cuttack7Telangana5Varanasi5Rajkot4Guwahati3Jodhpur2Panaji2Rajasthan2Orissa1Ranchi1Nagpur1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Jabalpur1Amritsar1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 80I4Section 92C4Section 143(2)3Exemption3Disallowance3Addition to Income3Section 115J2Transfer Pricing2Deduction2

GREENPLY INDUSTRIES LIMITED,TINSUKIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-TINSUKIA, TINSUKIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 232/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 80ISection 92C

Dividend Distribution Tax amounting to Rs.66,87,361/-, in computing total income under the normal provisions of the Act. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) was not justified and grossly erred in not allowing exclusion of Excise Duty Exemption as capital receipt amounting to Rs.87,98,09,432/- availed during

ACIT, CIRCLE - TINSUKIA , TINSUKIA vs. M/S. GREENPLY INDUSTRIES LTD., TINSUKIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 359/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 80ISection 92C

Dividend Distribution Tax amounting to Rs.66,87,361/-, in computing total income under the normal provisions of the Act. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) was not justified and grossly erred in not allowing exclusion of Excise Duty Exemption as capital receipt amounting to Rs.87,98,09,432/- availed during

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. SHRI PANNALAL BHANSALI, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 428/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri P. S. Thuingaleng, ACIT
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act arose in this respect? 8.2. Ld. CIT(A) has not conducted any enquiry himself or caused to conduct an enquiry for examination of these transactions which have been claimed to be executed in the preceding years so as to ascertain whether these have been adequately subjected to taxation under the relevant