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.

31 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 201(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai669Delhi634Karnataka304Bangalore288Kolkata149Chennai146Ahmedabad124Jaipur102Pune74Hyderabad62Chandigarh58Cochin48Indore31Cuttack25Calcutta17Jodhpur17Lucknow16Visakhapatnam12Telangana12SC7Rajkot7Varanasi6Surat6Kerala5Guwahati5Rajasthan4Jabalpur2Nagpur2Dehradun2Amritsar2Raipur2Allahabad1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)27Section 143(3)20Section 194H20Section 26314Section 194J14TDS14Section 19511Addition to Income11Section 20110

M/S ISOFT HEALTH MANAGEMENT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1210/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanicomputer Sciences Dcit, Circle 11(4) Corporation India Private No. 14/3, 5Th Floor, R.P. Limited Bhawan Nrupathunga (Formerly Isoft Health Road Vs. Management (India) Pvt. Bangalore Ltd.) Unit-13, Block-2, Sdf Building Mpez Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaaco 2465N Assessee By Shri Vishal Kalra, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 03.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.08.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 153(1)Section 92C

3) of section 92C, the computation of total income having regard to the arm's length price so determined by the TPO is required to be done by the Assessing Officer under sub-section (4) of section 92C, read with sub-section (4) of section 92CA. In order to make a reference to the TPO, the Assessing Officer

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

Deduction9
Section 153A8
Disallowance7

THE ACIT, - 4(1), INDORE vs. M/S. YASH TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 616/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2014-15 Pan : Aaacy1868M

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 28Section 40

201-205, Bansi Trade Centre, 581/5, M.G. Road, Indore (Revenue) (Respondent) Revenue by Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT Assessee by Shri S.S. Solanki, CA Date of Hearing 10.10.2019 Date of Pronouncement 31.10.2019 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD. The above captioned appeal filed at the instance of revenue pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15 is directed against the orders

M/S ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS V A TECH HYDRO INDAI PVT. LTD.),MANDIDEEP vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 316/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

3,21,61,710/- from A.Y. 11-12 may be deleted. 6.3.4. The learned Counsel for the assessee, also placed reliance in the case of Sonata Infra Technology Ltd. (2006) 75 SOT 465(Mum), Tata Consultancy Ltd. 271 ITR 401 , Lucent Technologies Institute 2009-TIOL_161-ITAT-DEL, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd. 94 ITD 91, Property Quip corporation

THE DCIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 265/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

3,21,61,710/- from A.Y. 11-12 may be deleted. 6.3.4. The learned Counsel for the assessee, also placed reliance in the case of Sonata Infra Technology Ltd. (2006) 75 SOT 465(Mum), Tata Consultancy Ltd. 271 ITR 401 , Lucent Technologies Institute 2009-TIOL_161-ITAT-DEL, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd. 94 ITD 91, Property Quip corporation

M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS VA TECH HYDRO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 157/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

3,21,61,710/- from A.Y. 11-12 may be deleted. 6.3.4. The learned Counsel for the assessee, also placed reliance in the case of Sonata Infra Technology Ltd. (2006) 75 SOT 465(Mum), Tata Consultancy Ltd. 271 ITR 401 , Lucent Technologies Institute 2009-TIOL_161-ITAT-DEL, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd. 94 ITD 91, Property Quip corporation

THE ACIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 349/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

3,21,61,710/- from A.Y. 11-12 may be deleted. 6.3.4. The learned Counsel for the assessee, also placed reliance in the case of Sonata Infra Technology Ltd. (2006) 75 SOT 465(Mum), Tata Consultancy Ltd. 271 ITR 401 , Lucent Technologies Institute 2009-TIOL_161-ITAT-DEL, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd. 94 ITD 91, Property Quip corporation

M/S ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 75/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Andritz Hydro Private Dcit Circe 1(1) Ltd. Bhopal Vs. D-17, Mpakvn Industrial Area, Mandideep Raisen (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcv 2466 R Assessee By Shri Rahul, Kaul Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.08.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(3)

section 92D(1) and rules made thereunder or the information or data used in computation of arm’s length price is not reliable or correct. A similar explanation has been provided by the CBDT in circular no.12 dated 23rd August 2001. Thus, the Ld. AR has submitted as per the circular issued by the CBDT the TPO was bound

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 109/IND/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

Section 194J of the Act is not attracted in the case of "revenue sharing contract". According to Respondent No.1, in such contracts there is only sharing of revenue and, therefore, payments by revenue sharing cannot constitute "fees" under Section 194J of the Act. This submission is not accepted by the Department. We leave it there because this submission

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 110/IND/2015[2013-14 (for first three quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

Section 194J of the Act is not attracted in the case of "revenue sharing contract". According to Respondent No.1, in such contracts there is only sharing of revenue and, therefore, payments by revenue sharing cannot constitute "fees" under Section 194J of the Act. This submission is not accepted by the Department. We leave it there because this submission

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 111/IND/2015[2013-14 (Quarter 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

Section 194J of the Act is not attracted in the case of "revenue sharing contract". According to Respondent No.1, in such contracts there is only sharing of revenue and, therefore, payments by revenue sharing cannot constitute "fees" under Section 194J of the Act. This submission is not accepted by the Department. We leave it there because this submission

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE CIT (TDS), BHOPAL

ITA 415/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 263

Section 194J read with clause (b) of the Explanation to Section 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [`Act', for short] which, inter alia, states that "fees for technical services" shall have the same meaning as contained in Explanation 2 to clause (vii) of Section 9(1) of the Act. Right from 1979 various judgments of the High Courts

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. DCIT TDS, INDORE

ITA 265/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 263

Section 194J read with clause (b) of the Explanation to Section 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [`Act', for short] which, inter alia, states that "fees for technical services" shall have the same meaning as contained in Explanation 2 to clause (vii) of Section 9(1) of the Act. Right from 1979 various judgments of the High Courts

AG-8 VENTURES LTD.,BHOPAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

ITA 923/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40A(3)Section 80I

201, Shrihti Complex, Zone- I, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal, 21 registries were found. Further, 6 sale deeds were impounded from the office of Aakriti Aqua City Gram- Chhan 11th Mile Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal. During the course of assessment, Ld. AO examined the various parties from whom the assesee purchased the land, and found that ‘on-money’ has been paid

AG-8 VENTURES LTD.,BHOPAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

ITA 922/IND/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40A(3)Section 80I

201, Shrihti Complex, Zone- I, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal, 21 registries were found. Further, 6 sale deeds were impounded from the office of Aakriti Aqua City Gram- Chhan 11th Mile Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal. During the course of assessment, Ld. AO examined the various parties from whom the assesee purchased the land, and found that ‘on-money’ has been paid

M/S TESLA TRANSFORMERS ,BHOPAL vs. ITO(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, BHOPAL

In the result, Ground Numbers 1 to 4 of assessee’s appeal are dismissed

ITA 100/IND/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Anil Khabya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9

3 Tesla Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO (International Taxation) made to such parties. During the course of 201 proceedings, the assessee submitted letter dated 29-09-2015, wherein the accountant of the assessee submitted that the “process is that after raising queries their agents/residential sales representatives will contact us personally or telephonically and after negotiations the price will be finalised

MAAN ALUMINIUM LTD.,PITHAMPUR vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

ITA 6/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Maan Aluminium Ltd. Ito (It & Tp), 427, Orbit Mall, Bhopal बनाम/ 4Th Floor, Ab Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aapcm 0088 C / Tan: Bplm 07361 E Assessee By Shri Sudhir Padliya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.03.2023

Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9Section 90(4)

201(1)/(1A) and created demand of tax and interest as per working made in Para No. 8 of his order. CIT(A)’s Order: 5. During first-appeal, Ld. CIT(A) made an initial observation that section 90(4) of the Act requires production of Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) for claiming benefit of DTAA. But the assessee

M/S SANGHVI FOODS P LTD, ,INDORE vs. ITO (IT & TP) , BHOPAL

In the result common issue raised in

ITA 743/IND/2018[15-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Jun 2020

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 195Section 201

201(1A) 01 Payment to M/s 38,093 6,349 2,616 654 Buhler AG Switzerland 02 Payment to M/s 2,83,438 47,240 19,463 3,892 Buhler AG ITANo.743 & 744/Ind/2018 Sanghvi Foods Private Limited Switzerland Total 22079 4546 05] That on perusal of the Purchase Order and Invoices Your Honours will appreciate that Assessee company has basically

M/S SANGHVI FOODS P LTD, ,INDORE vs. ITO (IT & TP) , BHOPAL

In the result common issue raised in

ITA 744/IND/2018[16-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Jun 2020

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 195Section 201

201(1A) 01 Payment to M/s 38,093 6,349 2,616 654 Buhler AG Switzerland 02 Payment to M/s 2,83,438 47,240 19,463 3,892 Buhler AG ITANo.743 & 744/Ind/2018 Sanghvi Foods Private Limited Switzerland Total 22079 4546 05] That on perusal of the Purchase Order and Invoices Your Honours will appreciate that Assessee company has basically

HERSHEY INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRANSFER PRICING) , BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 97/IND/2018[16-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Dec 2022
For Appellant: Shri Anil Khabya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R
Section 133Section 201(1)

Transfer House, Hiranandani Vs Pricing), Gardens, Powai, Bhopal Mumbai-400076 (Respondent) PAN: AABCT6106C (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Anil Khabya, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 13-10-2022 Date of pronouncement : 02 -12-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- These two appeals filed by assessee for A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2016-17 arise from

HERSHEY INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRANSFER PRICING) , BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 96/IND/2018[15-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Dec 2022
For Appellant: Shri Anil Khabya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R
Section 133Section 201(1)

Transfer House, Hiranandani Vs Pricing), Gardens, Powai, Bhopal Mumbai-400076 (Respondent) PAN: AABCT6106C (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Anil Khabya, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 13-10-2022 Date of pronouncement : 02 -12-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- These two appeals filed by assessee for A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2016-17 arise from