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”+ Section 273Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai85Delhi28Visakhapatnam4Surat4Pune4Jaipur3Indore3Kolkata3Cuttack2Chennai2Amritsar2Hyderabad1Ahmedabad1Varanasi1Rajkot1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 271B15Section 44A9Section 271A7Section 92B3Penalty3Section 273B2

ACIT-2(1), UJJAIN, UJJAIN vs. M/S RUCHI J OIL PVT. LTD,, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal ITANo

ITA 82/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Indore17 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 271ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 91D(1)Section 92BSection 92D(1)

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and stated that the TPO has considered purchase of undertaking by way of slump sale from Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. as a Specified Domestic Transaction. ii) Thereafter, in para 5.5.2 of the order the AO stated “Therefore, the order of Ld. TPO u/s 92CA as regards valuation of the above transaction and the categorization

BHAGWAN DAS RAI,ITARSI vs. THE ITO WARD-, ITARSI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 16/IND/2023[22017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Bhagwandas Rai, Ito, M/S.Deva Marketing, Ward-2, बनाम/ Hospital Road

Section 144Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

price of coupons and transferred to telecom companies, was not assessee’s turnover. Since the commission amount did not exceed the limit of Rs. 1 crore prescribed in section 44AB for audit of accounts, the assessee did not get the audit done. Ld. AR submitted that the section 273B

SACHCHIDANAND TRIPATHI ,BHOPAL vs. ITO 5(2) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITANo

ITA 339/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2014-15 Sachchidanand Tripati Ito 5(2) Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Aampt3788N Appellant By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Respondent By Shri Amit Soni, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.12.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Bhopal Dated 01.05.2019 Which Are Arising Out Of The Order U/S 271B Of The Income Tax Act 1961(In Short The ‘Act’) Dated 26.05.2017 Framed By Ito-5(2) Bhopal.

Section 133(6)Section 271BSection 44A

price of the commodities received by an assessee during the course of his trading or business activities. It does not differentiate between commodities sold under the head speculative business/ normal business. Transfer of immovable or movable property by way of investment is not included by the provisions of the section 44AB of the Act. Provisions of the Act are clear