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.

313 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 2(24)(x)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,339Mumbai980Bangalore413Karnataka313Ahmedabad244Kolkata189Hyderabad175Jaipur166Chennai153Chandigarh112Pune108Indore67Calcutta53Cochin52Surat40Raipur27Telangana27Rajkot21Guwahati21Nagpur20Lucknow19SC19Cuttack15Jodhpur14Amritsar13Visakhapatnam12Agra10Ranchi8Allahabad5Rajasthan4Orissa3Panaji2Dehradun2DIPAK MISRA V. GOPALA GOWDA1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income55Section 26018Section 43Section 2633Section 65(1)3Section 633Section 1002Section 144C2Section 13(8)2

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

X of Income Tax are not applicable as parameters laid down in sub section (1) and (2) of section 92A are not fulfilled? 14 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is correct in holding that there is no relationship of 'associated enterprise' between the assessee respondent company and GLA International

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

Showing 1–20 of 313 · Page 1 of 16

...
Disallowance2
WP/11618/2016HC Karnataka27 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

x) of Explanation 1 to section 153, if the period of limitation available to the Transfer Pricing Officer for making an order is less than sixty days, such remaining period shall be deemed to have been extended accordingly.) (4. On receipt of the order under sub-section (3), the Assessing Officer shall proceed to compute the total income

M/S J K CEMENT WORKS vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

STRP/100001/2014HC Karnataka23 Mar 2017

Bench: H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 63Section 65Section 65(1)

transfer of property in goods in connection with the execution of works contract, that is claimed as deduction. (d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where any dealer has sold goods at a price lesser than the price of such goods purchased by him, the amount of input tax credit shall be restricted to the amount of output

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PRAVEEN V DODDANAVAR

ITA/100003/2014HC Karnataka20 Feb 2017

Bench: SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 63Section 65Section 65(1)

transfer of property in goods in connection with the execution of works contract, that is claimed as deduction. (d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where any dealer has sold goods at a price lesser than the price of such goods purchased by him, the amount of input tax credit shall be restricted to the amount of output

THE BAILHONGAL URBAN COOPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/100001/2014HC Karnataka16 Dec 2015

Bench: S.ABDUL NAZEER,P.S.DINESH KUMAR

Section 63Section 65Section 65(1)

transfer of property in goods in connection with the execution of works contract, that is claimed as deduction. (d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where any dealer has sold goods at a price lesser than the price of such goods purchased by him, the amount of input tax credit shall be restricted to the amount of output

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SOFTBRANDS INDIA

ITA/536/2015HC Karnataka25 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

2) An appeal may lie under this section from an appellate decree passed ex- parte. Date of Judgment 25-06-2018 I.T.A.No.536/2015 C/w I.T.A.No.537/2015 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Softbrands India P. Ltd., 35/80 (3) In an appeal under this section, the memorandum of appeal shall precisely state the substantial question of law involved

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SOFTBRANDS INDIA

ITA/537/2015HC Karnataka25 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

2) An appeal may lie under this section from an appellate decree passed ex- parte. Date of Judgment 25-06-2018 I.T.A.No.536/2015 C/w I.T.A.No.537/2015 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Softbrands India P. Ltd., 35/80 (3) In an appeal under this section, the memorandum of appeal shall precisely state the substantial question of law involved

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/881/2008HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of arms’ length price. As per the return filed the tax payable was Rs.48,38,27,302/-. The assessee also claimed TDS of Rs.6,02,14,066/- and advance tax payment of Rs.59,50,80,000/-. The assessee claimed refund of Rs.17,12,21,725/-. The return of income was processed

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/211/2009HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of arms’ length price. As per the return filed the tax payable was Rs.48,38,27,302/-. The assessee also claimed TDS of Rs.6,02,14,066/- and advance tax payment of Rs.59,50,80,000/-. The assessee claimed refund of Rs.17,12,21,725/-. The return of income was processed

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

x) or clause (xa) of section 47, the cost of acquisition of the asset to the assessee shall be deemed to be that part of the cost of debenture, debenture-stock, bond or deposit certificates in relation to which such asset is acquired by the assessee. 16 This amendment will take effect from 1st April, 2008 and will accordingly apply

M/S SSJV PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. M/S ALLAHABAD BANK

In the result, the writ appeals are disposed in

WA/545/2020HC Karnataka29 Jan 2021

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,R. NATARAJ

Section 17Section 31Section 4

24 of 1934); (d) creation of security interest in any vessel as defined in clause (55) of section 3 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (44 of 1958); (e) * * * * * (f) any rights of unpaid seller under section 47 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 (3 of 1930); (g) any properties not liable to attachment (excluding the properties specifically charged

SRI U M RAMESH RAO vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

In the result, the writ appeals are disposed in

WA/538/2020HC Karnataka29 Jan 2021

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,R. NATARAJ

Section 17Section 31Section 4

24 of 1934); (d) creation of security interest in any vessel as defined in clause (55) of section 3 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (44 of 1958); (e) * * * * * (f) any rights of unpaid seller under section 47 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 (3 of 1930); (g) any properties not liable to attachment (excluding the properties specifically charged

R JANARDHANA BABU vs. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed

WP/37528/2010HC Karnataka07 Jul 2017

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa

24 81. G Srinivasa, s/o Gurappa, aged about 51 years, working as Pharma Assistant Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited, Devanahalli Road, Off Old Madras Road, Bangalore-560049 82. B K Somashekar, s/o B Krishna, aged about 52 years, working as Pharma Assistant Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited, Devanahalli Road, Off Old Madras Road, Bangalore-560049 83. K S Ramakrishna, s/o K Subba Rao, aged

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS

Appeal is dismissed with costs

ITA/70/2007HC Karnataka26 Sept 2012

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice N.K.Sudhindrarao R.S.A.No.70/2007

Section 100

price for sale of property sold by her husband which is western portion of Tataguni estate in favour of plaintiff-Company and she has not agreed to sell the plaint schedule property to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre. 17. It is further claimed that Managing Director of plaintiff-Company K.T. Bhagath was with

M/S SREE JAYALAKSHMI TEXTILES vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION

WP/22348/2015HC Karnataka15 Dec 2015

Bench: The Date Fixed For Sale Of Transfer & In Such Event The Secured Asset Shall Not Be Sold & That Once The Auction Sale Process Is Commenced & The Property Is Auctioned & Sold On The Date Fixed For Sale & The Sale In Favour Of The Highest Bidder Is Confirmed & 25%

Section 13(8)

24 any of the recourse taken by the secured creditor under sub-section (4) of section 13. (4) If, the Debts Recovery Tribunal declares the recourse taken by a secured creditor under sub-section (4) of section 13, is in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other

M/S SREE JAYALAKSHMI TEXTILES vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION

WP/29362/2015HC Karnataka15 Dec 2015

Bench: The Date Fixed For Sale Of Transfer & In Such Event The Secured Asset Shall Not Be Sold & That Once The Auction Sale Process Is Commenced & The Property Is Auctioned & Sold On The Date Fixed For Sale & The Sale In Favour Of The Highest Bidder Is Confirmed & 25%

Section 13(8)

24 any of the recourse taken by the secured creditor under sub-section (4) of section 13. (4) If, the Debts Recovery Tribunal declares the recourse taken by a secured creditor under sub-section (4) of section 13, is in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT(A) vs. M/S BIESSE MANUFACTURING COMPANY PVT LTD

ITA/1085/2017HC Karnataka05 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 2(24)(x)Section 260Section 36(1)(va)Section 6

Transfer Pricing Officer has considered the comparable on the basis of qualitative and quantitative filters? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the disallowance made by assessing authority under section 2(24)(x

MR. BINEESH KODIYERI vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

WP/13261/2020HC Karnataka16 Mar 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj Writ Petition No. 13261 Of 2020 (Gm-Res) Between: Mr. Bineesh Kodiyeri S/O Mr. Kodiyeri Balakrishnan Aged About 37 Years Kootamvilla Lane, Maruthankuzhi Thiruvananthapuram District Kerala State – 695013

Section 19Section 482

x) & (y) of the PMLA. Therefore, the Directorate of Enforcement has recorded Enforcement Case Information Report in ECIR No. BGZO/32/ 2020 on 09.09.2020 and initiated investigation under the PMLA. 3.6. Post recording of ECIR on 09.09.2020, the Complainant took up the further investigation WP No. 13261 of 2020 24 of the above case and initially sought for the issuance

M/S INDUS TOWERS LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

In the result, we pass the following order:

WA/3403/2011HC Karnataka07 Sept 2011

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,N.KUMAR

Section 4

24, In the. decision of BSNL case, the Hon’b.ie Supreme Court has pre.sc.r.i.bed certain. attributes for a t..ransaction to conslitute a “Transibr of Right to. usc goocI C 47 ‘(a) thc re must be goods avallabk for delivery ,) iliac tnu hr a ennsenu ad iden, ‘va tn the identity of thc toods. Ic) the iranqieree qhould have

HINDUSTAN CALCINED METALS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/46232/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

24, 1975, which provided for levy of forest development tax on disposal of forest produce by the State Government under Sections 98-A and 98-B of the Forest Act. 3. Further, in the year 1989, by Act 10 of 1989, the provision of Section 98-A was made applicable, with effect from February 14, 1978, to the Corporations owned