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.

5 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 40A(2)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi466Mumbai417Bangalore155Ahmedabad115Chennai115Pune102Kolkata93Jaipur48Hyderabad29Surat27Cochin26Raipur24Indore22Visakhapatnam17Chandigarh17Jodhpur12Cuttack10Rajkot9Agra5Karnataka5Guwahati4Calcutta3Amritsar3Lucknow2Nagpur2SC2Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 26016Section 14A2Disallowance2

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 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA/133/2007HC Karnataka23 Aug 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 260

40A(9) of the Act? 7 5. In ITA 133/07, the following two substantial questions of law arise for our consideration: A-9. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the stock transfers made to the new industrial undertaking at Amalnar for manufacture of fatty acid and glycerin plant should be taken at market price

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 4 vs. M/S JUPITER

Appeal is allowed in part accordingly

ITA/297/2017HC Karnataka13 Mar 2023

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 14ASection 260Section 36(1)(ii)Section 37Section 40A(2)

pricing of these shares at a premium of Rs.490/- per share? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in deleting the disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act by relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ADC INDIA COMMUNICATIONS LTD

The appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned

ITA/494/2022HC Karnataka30 Sept 2024

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

Section 260Section 40Section 40A(7)Section 9(1)(vii)

Transfer Pricing Officer had chosen comparables after satisfying required tests namely, qualitative and quantitative filers and considering their functions and as such the order passed by Tribunal is perverse in nature? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse in nature as Tribunal has directed the assessing