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 144Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,950Mumbai1,753Bangalore842Hyderabad279Pune267Kolkata215Chennai190Ahmedabad132Visakhapatnam33Jaipur30Chandigarh30Cochin29Karnataka21Indore16Rajkot15Dehradun15Surat12Cuttack8Kerala5Telangana4Panaji4Amritsar3Guwahati3SC3Calcutta2Raipur2Jabalpur1Lucknow1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 26019Section 92C16Transfer Pricing16Section 144C13Section 144C(13)10Section 143(3)10Addition to Income9Section 260A8Section 143(2)6

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

ITA/100012/2017HC Karnataka17 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 260ASection 37(1)Section 92ASection 92C

Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act on 31.12.2013, determining total income at Rs.10,86,34,35,052/- by making various additions, which reads as under: Additional / Issues Rs. Transfer pricing

DEVAS MULTIMEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

Limitation/Time-bar6
Section 1445
Disallowance4
WP/11618/2016
HC Karnataka
27 Sept 2019

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.B. Bajanthri Writ Petition No.11618 Of 2016 (T-It) Between:

Section 142(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 263Section 92C

Section 144C was as under: “The subjects of transfer pricing audit and the taxation of foreign company are at nascent

M/S HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, both the writ petitions are

ITA/571/2017HC Karnataka04 Jun 2025

Bench: This Court Under Section 260A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “It Act”), Questioning The Order Dated 21.06.2017 In It(Tp)A No.807/Bang/2016 Passed By Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Bengaluru (For Short “Tribunal”), Dismissing The Appeal Refusing To Declare The Proceedings Under Section 144C Of The It Act As Null & Void.

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 260Section 260ASection 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer passed order under Section 92CA on 30.01.2015. Thereafter, the respondent passed draft assessment order under Section 144C

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/431/2022HC Karnataka26 Sept 2025

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(4)Section 260Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and (ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company:]] [Provided that such eligible assessee shall not include person referred to in sub-section (1) of section 158BA or other person referred to in section 158BD.]" - 12 - ITA No. 431 of 2022 10. An analysis

WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/20040/2019HC Karnataka25 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit Writ Petition No.20040/2019 (T-It) Between:

Section 1Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 254Section 92C

Section 244A(1A) of the Act has styled the operative portion of the impugned order as under: “In this case, the Hon’ble ITAT, Bengaluru has remitted back the issue of Transfer Pricing to the AO for fresh assessment/re-assessment as per Para No. 5 & 6 of the ITAT order. Further, fresh approval has been taken from

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TEXPORT OVERSEAS PVT LTD

ITA/392/2018HC Karnataka12 Dec 2019

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 260ASection 8(2)(iii)Section 92BSection 92CSection 98B

144C(13) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act’) came to be passed on 30.06.2017 whereby the assessing officer had made transfer pricing adjustment and other additions. Assessing authority (for short ‘AO’) has made a reference to transfer pricing order under Section

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S FLEXTRONICS TECHNOLOGIES

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/332/2019HC Karnataka09 Jan 2023

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,G BASAVARAJA

Section 144CSection 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 153(3)Section 260

Transfer Pricing Officer ('TPO' for short) for re-working the Arms Length Price (ALP). The Order Giving Effect (OGE) in respect of DRP's direction corrected with the TP adjustments were not received in time and the Assessing Officer has confirmed the draft assessment order and the same is in violation of Section 144C

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. INTEL CAPITAL (CAYMAN) CORPORATION

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby

ITA/385/2013HC Karnataka06 Oct 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 115ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 260Section 260ASection 47

144C of the Act, the Assessing Authority, vide order dated 18.02.2011 inter alia held that assessee had acquired foreign currency convertible bonds and after conversion of the same into shares, sold the same during the relevant previous year and disclosed short term capital gains from the transaction and paid tax thereon at the prescribed rate. It was further held that

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ALPHA ELSEC DEFENCE AND AEROSPACE SYSTEMS PVT LTD,

ITA/48/2024HC Karnataka19 Aug 2025

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

Section 144CSection 260Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer/Assessing Officer for verification and re-determination of ALP. The TPO giving effect to the order of the Tribunal has determined the re-adjusted ALP. It is not in dispute that the ALP determined by the TPO while giving effect to the order of Tribunal is in variance. Section 144C

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S TATA POWER SOLAR SYSTEMS LIMITED

Appeals are dismissed at the stage of admission itself as being

ITA/527/2022HC Karnataka12 Aug 2024

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 260Section 92C

transfer pricing adjustment was made, as also certain other additions on corporate tax issues were made. 4. Aggrieved by the draft assessment order, the assessee filed objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel6. In response to the objections, the DRP issued directions under Section 144C

M/S AMD FAR EAST LTD., vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX

ITA/419/2016HC Karnataka08 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 115JSection 143Section 144CSection 260Section 260ASection 37Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer [TPO] for determining arm’s length price under Section 92CA of the Act. On receipt of the order passed under Section 92CA Act, the respondent passed the draft assessment order under Section 143[3] read with Section 144C

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S YODLEE INFOTECH PVT LTD

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/51/2014HC Karnataka28 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.I.ARUN

Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(1)Section 260Section 260ASection 92C

Price (ALP) of the international transactions was determined at Rs.40,34,77,023/- as against revenue of 6 Rs.36,90,62,491/- charged by the assessee. 3. The Assessing Officer thereafter issued a draft assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C of the Act on 23.10.2011, by which income of the assessee was determined at Rs.3

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD

ITA/455/2022HC Karnataka25 Nov 2025

Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD,T.M.NADAF

Section 144Section 144CSection 153Section 254Section 260

Section 144C[6] of the IT Act, has issued certain directions on 24.11.2015. The Transfer Pricing Officer [TPO] has communicated

PR.COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S TRIANZ HOLDINGS PVT LTD

ITA/551/2016HC Karnataka03 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 10ASection 260

Section 10A of the Act only qua the eligible under taking and without reference to other eligible or non eligible units or undertakings of same assessee. Regarding Substantial Question No.2: 4. The learned Tribunal, after discussing the rival contentions of both the Appellants-Revenue and Respondent-Assessee, has returned a finding as under: “(iii) Transfer pricing adjustment: Rs.2

SIMPLILEARN SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/4212/2022HC Karnataka04 Mar 2022

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad

Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 92C

TRANSFER PRICING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 92CA(3) OF THE ACT, VIDE ANNX-A AS BEING ILLEGAL AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW; ii) QUASH THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.04.2021 PASSED BY R-3 VIDE ANNX-B AS BEING ILLEGAL AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW. iii) QUASH AND SETTING ASIDE DIRECTIONS ISSUED ON 24.01.2022 BY DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL UNDER SECTION 144C

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY INDIA PVT LTD

In the result, we do not find

ITA/307/2018HC Karnataka06 Apr 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 143(2)Section 153(1)(a)Section 153(3)(ii)Section 260Section 260ASection 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer by an order dated 13.06.2012 after affording an opportunity to the assessee passed an draft order of assessment on 05.07.2012 and forwarded the same to the assessee on 11.07.2012. The assessee filed an objection before the Dispute Resolution Panel on 09.08.2012. Thereafter, the Dispute Resolution Panel passed an order on 22.04.2013. The Assessing Officer passed a final

HERBALIFE INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the assessee's appeal for

ITA/433/2018HC Karnataka20 May 2025

Bench: V KAMESWAR RAO,S RACHAIAH

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 260Section 263

144C of the IT Act. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order determined the total income of the appellant as Rs.4,42,53,130/- after making adjustments to the returned loss by the appellant in the revised return dated 31.03.2010. The Assessing Officer thereafter issued a notice dated 19.08.2013 under Section 154 of the IT Act proposing to rectify

XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:

WP/16692/2022HC Karnataka16 Dec 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

Section 281BSection 281ESection 92C

transfer pricing adjustment. Pursuant to the said order, the Assessing Officer issued a Notice under Section 142(1) of the I.T.Act for the Assessment Year 2018-19 inter alia calling upon the petitioner to show cause, as to why payment of royalty to the foreign entity i.e., Qualcomm and Beijing Xiaomi Mobile should not be disallowed. On 10.08.2022, petitioner submitted

M/S HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals stand disposed of

ITA/764/2018HC Karnataka02 Jul 2025

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,T.M.NADAF

Section 260Section 92A

transfer pricing adjustment of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23552-DB ITA No. 764 of 2018 C/W ITA No. 835 of 2018 Rs.31,69,02,034/- in respect of AMP Expenditure without appreciating that assessee has incurred huge expenditure for advertisement and selling i.e. for marketing its products though it does not won the title to the brands

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S QUANTECH GLOBAL SERVICES LTD

ITA/439/2018HC Karnataka04 Feb 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 143(2)Section 260Section 268

Pricing Officer (TPO) vide letter dated 30.11.2009 and during the course of proceeding before the TPO, assessee vide its letter dated 09.06.2010 categorically stated that its registered office was at Hyderabad and it stood merged with Wipro Ltd., pursuant to the scheme of amalgamation approved by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide order dated 21.02.2008 and scheme of amalgamation