BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

6 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 80G(5)(vi)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai48Delhi30Pune20Bangalore19Kolkata14Rajkot10Chennai8Jaipur6Hyderabad4Cochin3Agra2Jodhpur2Indore1Nagpur1Amritsar1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 80G23Section 12A9Addition to Income4Section 143(3)3Section 403Section 80G(5)3Deduction3Penalty3TDS3Disallowance

NASH FASHION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

ITA 159/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh Addl. CIT a
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80G

price of the equipment purchased directly by the done institution. The first scenario will not qualify for deduction as what has been donated is property in kind, however the second scenario will quality for deduction as what has been spent and transferred is sum of money and not property in kind. In our view, the facts of the present scenario

3
Section 142(1)2
Section 12

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. NASH FASHION(INDIA) LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

ITA 89/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh Addl. CIT a
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80G

price of the equipment purchased directly by the done institution. The first scenario will not qualify for deduction as what has been donated is property in kind, however the second scenario will quality for deduction as what has been spent and transferred is sum of money and not property in kind. In our view, the facts of the present scenario

RAJASTHAN EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose

ITA 563/JPR/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jul 2024AY 2024-25
For Appellant: \n2. Ms.Ruchika Sogani, Advocate-ld.AR of the assessee
Section 10Section 11Section 8Section 80GSection 80G(5)

vi) an entity making fresh application for approval under clause (23C) of\nsection 10, for registration under section 12AA, for approval under section\n80G shall be provisionally approved or registered for three years on the\nbasis of application without detailed enquiry even in the cases where\nactivities of the entity are yet to begin and then it has to apply

NASH FASHION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

ITA 160/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh Addl. CIT
Section 40Section 80G

5 to Section 80G of the\nIT Act.\n1.15\nIn regard to counter submissions made by the AO and filed before the\nhon'ble ITAT by the Additional CIT (Sr. DR), ITAT Jaipur and a copy there of\ngiven to the assessee inter-alia mentioning that the assessee failed to bring any\nevidence on record that the donation was made

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

ITA 1021/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment [or fresh order under section 92CA, as the case may be], such effect shall be given within a period of three months from the end of the month in which order under section 250 or section 254 or section

RITIKA VEGETABLE OIL PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 495/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) Against The Order Dated 21.12.2018 Passed Under Section 143(3)Of The Income Tax Act, By Acit, Central Circle, Alwar [ For Short Ao].

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ajey Malik, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 92BSection 92C

section 40A during the year under consideration. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Transfer Pricing Officer 2(3)(2), New Delhi passed order u/s 92CA(3) of the Act on 31/10/2018 wherein no adverse inference has been drawn in 3 Ritika Vegetable Oil Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT respect of the Specified Domestic Transactions undertaken by the assessee company during