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.

15 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 92A(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai100Delhi60Bangalore49Kolkata38Pune31Chennai27Hyderabad15Ahmedabad11Karnataka9Jaipur5Cuttack3Amritsar2Cochin2SC2Telangana2Allahabad1Chandigarh1Jabalpur1Guwahati1Indore1

Key Topics

Section 80I28Section 143(3)25Section 14A14Section 115J14Addition to Income13Section 92C12Transfer Pricing11Deduction9Section 271A

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. LABZONE ELECTRONICS CITY PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S ALEXANDRIA LABSPACE ELECTRONICS CITY PRIVATE LIMITED), HYDERABAD

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1489/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year: 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/S. Labzone Electronics Of Income Tax, City Private Limited Circle 16(1), (Formerly Known As M/S. Hyderabad. Alexandria Labspace Electronics City Private Limited), Hyderabad. Pan :Aajca1470G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P.V.S.S. Prasad. Revenue By: Shri Yvst Sai. Date Of Hearing: 14.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.02.2022 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Revenue’S Appeal For A.Y. 2013-14 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 4, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 17.07.2019 In Case No.10331/17-18/Dcit, Cir.1(1)/Cit(A)-4/Hyd/19-20, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short, ‘The Act’]. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Deleting Section 94A(4) Addition Of Rs.18,86,00,000/- Made In The Course Of Assessment Framed On 29.12.2016. The Cit(A)’S Lower Appellate Detailed Discussion To This Effect Reads As Follows :-

For Appellant: Shri P.V.S.S. PrasadFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 143(3)Section 94ASection 94A(4)
8
Section 92A8
Disallowance8
Depreciation7

pricing regulations would be applicable. (2) The CSDT on 14.12.2016 issued a notification No. 114/2016 vide SO No.4033 (E) (read with Corrigendum Notification No.119/2016 dated 16.12.2016 vide SO No.4082 (E) retrospectively rescinding the earlier notification issued in 2013 and thereby declaring Cyprus as normal tax jurisdiction and not an NJA. In other words CSDT had withdrawn the original notification

NEOVANTAGE INNOVATION PARK PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 923/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer (“Ld. TPO”) under section 92CA of the Act for determining the arm’s length price. The Ld. TPO, vide order dated 30.12.2022, proposed an adjustment of Rs.13,28,00,656/- on account of interest paid on Non-Convertible Debentures (“NCDs”) and Rs.86,88,495/- on account of interest paid on Compulsory Convertible Debentures (“CCDs”). Accordingly

NEOVANTAGE BIO-TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE 5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 924/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer (“Ld. TPO”) under section 92CA of the Act for determining the arm’s length price. The Ld. TPO, vide order dated 30.12.2022, proposed an adjustment of Rs.13,28,00,656/- on account of interest paid on Non-Convertible Debentures (“NCDs”) and Rs.86,88,495/- on account of interest paid on Compulsory Convertible Debentures (“CCDs”). Accordingly

ASTRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED (AMALGAMATED WITH MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED) HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 952/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Astrix Laboratories Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Limited, (Amalgamated Of Income Tax, With M/S. Mylan Circle 16(2), Laboratories Limited), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aafca4120R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri K.A. Sai Prasad. Revenue By: Sri Rajendra Kumar, Cit Date Of Hearing: 20.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.06.2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Of Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 16(2), Hyderabad Dt.31.03.2017 For The Assessment Year 2007-08 On The Following Grounds : “1. The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 92Ca Of The Income Tax Act, Passed On 31.03.2017 Is Contrary T The Facts & Law. 2. The Tpo Erred In Not Following The Hon’Ble Tribunal’S Directions & Thereby Making An Adjustment Of Rs.4,61,00,000/- U/S 92Ca Of The Act In Respect Of Sales Made To Associated Enterprises.” 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Sri Rajendra Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 253Section 92ASection 92C

2) of the Act was issued. Since the assessee transacted with Associated Enterprise as defined in Section 92A of the Act, the case was referred to Transfer Pricing

MYLAN LABORATORIES LTD,(FORMERLY MATRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED), HYD HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 626/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Smt. T.H. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92ASection 92C

Section 92A of the Act, the case was referred to Transfer Pricing Officer [TPO] who issued Transfer Pricing Order dated 27-01-2014 by making an adjustment of Rs 12,65,12,038/- u/s 92CA of the Act. The AO framed a Draft Assessment Order u/s 143(3) dated 10-03-2014 taking into account the above Transfer Pricing Order

DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. MYLAN LABORATORIES LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 659/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Smt. T.H. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92ASection 92C

Section 92A of the Act, the case was referred to Transfer Pricing Officer [TPO] who issued Transfer Pricing Order dated 27-01-2014 by making an adjustment of Rs 12,65,12,038/- u/s 92CA of the Act. The AO framed a Draft Assessment Order u/s 143(3) dated 10-03-2014 taking into account the above Transfer Pricing Order

DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MATRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 452/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Smt. T.H. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92ASection 92C

Section 92A of the Act, the case was referred to Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO), who issued Transfer Pricing Order dated 12-01-2015 by making an adjustment of Rs. Nil u/s 92CA of the Act. The AO framed Assessment Order u/s 143(3) dated 30-04-2015 taking into account the above Transfer Pricing Order. The AO vide his draft

MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MATRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 362/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Smt. T.H. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92ASection 92C

Section 92A of the Act, the case was referred to Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO), who issued Transfer Pricing Order dated 12-01-2015 by making an adjustment of Rs. Nil u/s 92CA of the Act. The AO framed Assessment Order u/s 143(3) dated 30-04-2015 taking into account the above Transfer Pricing Order. The AO vide his draft

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(2), , HYDERABAD vs. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED (BEING THE AMALGAMATED COMPANY OF ASTRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED), , HYDERABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1666/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 246ASection 92ASection 92C

2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued. 3. Since the assessee transacted with Associated Enterprises (AE) as defined in Section 92A of the Act, the case was referred to Transfer Pricing

MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MATRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED), HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 953/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Mylan Laboratories Vs. Dcit,Circle-16(2) Limited(Formerly Matrix It Towers, Masab Tank Laboratories Limited) Hyderabad-500 004 Plot No.564/A/22, Road No.92, Jubilee Hills Hyderabad-500 033

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar,CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 35Section 92ASection 92C

Section 92A of the Act, the case was referred to Transfer Pricing Officer (Additional Commissioner of Income Tax), who issued Transfer Pricing Order u/s 92CA of the Act dated 31- 3-2010. The Assessing Officer framed Draft Assessment Order u/s 143(3) dated 31.12.2010 taking into account the above Transfer Pricing Order and determined the total income

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

transfer does not come.” 7 M/s. HES Infra Pvt. Ltd. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before

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

transfer does not come.” 7 M/s. HES Infra Pvt. Ltd. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before

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

transfer does not come.” 7 M/s. HES Infra Pvt. Ltd. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before

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

transfer does not come.” 7 M/s. HES Infra Pvt. Ltd. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. JODAS EXPOIM PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 702/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.702/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dy. C.I.T Vs. M/S. Jodas Expoim (P) Ltd Central Circle 3(2) Siddipet, Telangana Hyderabad Pan:Aabcj8653L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 7/5/2024 Arising From The Penalty Order Passed U/S 271Aa Of The I.T. Act, 1961 For The A.Y 2016-17. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S 271Aa Of The Act Even Though The Assessee Failed To File Form 3Ceb As Mandated U/S 92E Of The Act Within The Time Prescribed U/S 139(1) Of The Act? 2) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S 271Aa Of The Act Even Though The Assessee Failed To Report

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 115JSection 133ASection 139(1)Section 233ASection 271ASection 92ASection 92CSection 92DSection 92E

92A of the Act r.w. Rule 10D of the I.T. Rules, 1962. The learned CIT (A) deleted the Page 2 of 6 ITA No 702 of 2024 JODAS EXPOIM P LTD penalty levied u/s 271AA of the Act while passing the impugned order. 4. Before the Tribunal, the learned DR has submitted that the survey was conducted in the case