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.

21 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 12Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi98Mumbai67Ahmedabad52Bangalore41Calcutta34Lucknow34Kolkata32Pune29Jaipur21Hyderabad21Visakhapatnam13Chandigarh11Agra7Chennai7Indore7Rajkot7Ranchi6Cuttack6Cochin5Telangana5SC4Varanasi4Allahabad3Nagpur3Raipur2Jodhpur2Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 80I32Exemption14Section 1111Section 25l10Addition to Income8Section 143(3)6Deduction6Section 285Section 12A5Section 153A

SANGHI INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 104/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 80ISection 92CSection 92E

12A) Nothing contained in sub-section (12) shall apply to any enterprise or undertaking which is transferred in a scheme of amalgamation or demerger on or after the 1st day of April, 2007. (13) Nothing contained in this section shall apply to any Special Economic Zones notified on or after the 1st day of April, 2005 in accordance with

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

4
Section 1394
Depreciation2

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 604/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

prices of materials, cost of laborers, overhead expenses etc. Therefore the Assessee is not merely a works contractor, but was engaged in development of project as a whole, and therefore, entitled for claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act, though not being the owner of the facility. It was contended that 14 M/s. HES Infra

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 605/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

prices of materials, cost of laborers, overhead expenses etc. Therefore the Assessee is not merely a works contractor, but was engaged in development of project as a whole, and therefore, entitled for claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act, though not being the owner of the facility. It was contended that 14 M/s. HES Infra

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 606/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

prices of materials, cost of laborers, overhead expenses etc. Therefore the Assessee is not merely a works contractor, but was engaged in development of project as a whole, and therefore, entitled for claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act, though not being the owner of the facility. It was contended that 14 M/s. HES Infra

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 603/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

prices of materials, cost of laborers, overhead expenses etc. Therefore the Assessee is not merely a works contractor, but was engaged in development of project as a whole, and therefore, entitled for claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act, though not being the owner of the facility. It was contended that 14 M/s. HES Infra

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. PRAKASH NIMMAGADDA, HYDERABAD, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 974/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR)
Section 17(2)(c)Section 28

12A or section 12AA or section 12AB]; or Page 22 of 43 ITA No 974 of 2017 Prakash Nimmagadda (VIII)by any fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or sub- clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause

DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, HYDERABAD vs. HYDERABAD METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 326/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya –
Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)

12A of the Act. Needless to say, the ld.CIT(A) / NFAC shall give due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue as per fact and law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.” 11. We respectfully, following the decision of co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal

HYDERABAD METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 271/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya –
Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)

12A of the Act. Needless to say, the ld.CIT(A) / NFAC shall give due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue as per fact and law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.” 11. We respectfully, following the decision of co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. NALGONDA DIOCESE SOCIETY, NALGONDA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2063/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alakamony, A.M. & Shri S.S.Godara, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri M. Muralidhar, DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)

price and upon such terms, conditions and rates of interest.” 3. Ld.D.R. vehemently contended during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in treating the assessee eligible for sec.11 exemption thereby holding that no transfer of its asset in favour of M/s Diocese Society had ever taken place. We find no merit

MYADAM KISHAN RAO CHARITABLE TRUST,HYDERABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 445/HYD/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G., Hon'Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Chary, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 34

12A(1)(ac) of the Act, it is abundantly clear that the objects of the Trust are charitable in nature and the Trust is carried out its activities in accordance with its objects. Therefore, in light of above undisputed facts it is necessary to examine the reasons given by the Ld.CIT(E) in their order

CANARA SECURITIES LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2321/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11 Canara Securities Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hydereabad. Income-Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pan – Aaacc8283G Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Ramkishore Jhawar Revenue By: Shri Nilanjan Dey Date Of Hearing: 08/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 03/07/2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ramkishore JhawarFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

12A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 (SEBI order no. WFM/PS/09/DNPD/APRIL/2012 dated 10.04.2012) in respect of NSE in the matter of modification of client codes of trades is noteworthy: "I am of the opinion that the number of errors is a strong indicator whether the errors are genuine or not. I note that the. broker enters other fields

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , WARANGAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1877/HYD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1878/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WARANGAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1879/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WARANGAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1880/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WARANGAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1881/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1726/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1725/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1724/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1723/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

12A of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.03.2016. However, during the assessment proceedings in the light of directions of Tribunal and grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act, Assessing Officer had completed the re-assessment interalia by making additions of Rs.2,24,32,226/- towards development charges, Rs.2,62,71,273/- towards Layout Regulation Scheme and Rs.11,54,441/- towards