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.

354 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 50(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,861Mumbai2,687Bangalore1,013Ahmedabad511Chennai509Kolkata460Hyderabad394Karnataka354Jaipur323Pune320Chandigarh247Surat226Indore186Cochin173Rajkot93Visakhapatnam74SC63Calcutta59Lucknow50Telangana50Raipur48Nagpur48Cuttack36Guwahati30Amritsar25Dehradun20Jodhpur19Agra17Varanasi10A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN9Rajasthan9Ranchi8Allahabad7Jabalpur7Kerala6Panaji5Orissa5Patna2Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1S.B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income45Section 26030Section 14810Section 260A9Section 10B8Section 1476Section 115W5Deduction4Section 1433

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

50 associated enterprise unless the criteria specified in sub-sec (2) are fulfilled."" The resultant of the amendment is thus explained that unless the requirements of sub-sec. (2) are fulfilled, the sub- section (1) cannot be applied at all. This implies that in order to constitute a relationship of an AE, the parameters laid down in both sub- sections

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

Showing 1–20 of 354 · Page 1 of 18

...
Section 43
Depreciation3
Disallowance2

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 u/s 143(1

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 u/s 143(1

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SOFTBRANDS INDIA

ITA/536/2015HC Karnataka25 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

1) (d) of the Act. Section 254 of the Act empowers the Appellate Tribunal to pass such orders on the appeals ‘as it thinks fit’ after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. 38. From the aforesaid Scheme of assessment with regard to international transactions, it is clear that the process of determination of ‘Arm’s Length Price

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SOFTBRANDS INDIA

ITA/537/2015HC Karnataka25 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

1) (d) of the Act. Section 254 of the Act empowers the Appellate Tribunal to pass such orders on the appeals ‘as it thinks fit’ after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. 38. From the aforesaid Scheme of assessment with regard to international transactions, it is clear that the process of determination of ‘Arm’s Length Price

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

50. Admittedly the arrest of the Petitioner in the present case has taken place without following Section 19 PMLA read with the relevant PML Arrest Rules and Form III. The grounds of arrest were furnished not “as soon as may be” as mandated by Section 19 (1) PMLA but only along with the short reply filed on 13th

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

Transfer Pricing Officer during the proceeding for assessment, reassessment made. The period as specified in sub- section (1)(2) & (3) shall be further extended by 12 months. 153(5) To give effect to the order of the higher authorities i.e. CIT (A), ITAT, HC and SC orders To give effect to an order passed by higher authorities other than those

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

price of transfer for the purpose of computation of deduction u/s.80HH and 80I of the Act? A-10. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that excise duty and sales tax should not be included in the total turnover for the purpose of computation of deduction u/s.80HHC of the Act? 6. In all the three appeals, the following question

THE MANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., vs. SRI A CHANDRASEKHAR

WP/15230/2022HC Karnataka17 Oct 2022

Bench: G.NARENDAR,P.N.DESAI

price fixed under any law, etc. 29. Deficiency of service is defined under Section 2(1)(g) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in the following manner: “2. (1)(g) ‘deficiency’ means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time

SMT. M R PRABHAVATHY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WTA/1/2019HC Karnataka04 Mar 2020

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice K.Natarajan Election Petition No.1 Of 2019 Connected With Election Petition No.2 Of 2019

Section 81

Section 33A of RP Act and 106 he has committed corrupt practice of bribery as contemplated under Sections 123(1)(A), 123(1)(B), 123(7), 123(7)(b), 123(vii)(d), 123(7)(h) and Section 123(8), 123(3), 3A and 123(6) of R.P. Act ? The petitioner in E.P. No.2/2019 has contended that respondent No.1 committed corrupt

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)

50, Garehatti, Chitradurga 577 501. Represented by its Partner, Sri. V. Rakesh Kumar, Aged about 38 years. …PETITIONER (By Shri Paras Jain, Advocate) AND: 1. M/s. International Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited, Having its office at #A/508, 5th Floor, 215, Atrium, Kanakia Spaces, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai 400 093, India. 2. M/s. Amma Bhagwan Traders, No.5, APMC Complex

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)

50, Garehatti, Chitradurga 577 501. Represented by its Partner, Sri. V. Rakesh Kumar, Aged about 38 years. …PETITIONER (By Shri Paras Jain, Advocate) AND: 1. M/s. International Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited, Having its office at #A/508, 5th Floor, 215, Atrium, Kanakia Spaces, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai 400 093, India. 2. M/s. Amma Bhagwan Traders, No.5, APMC Complex

M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/512/2017HC Karnataka23 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 2(22)(e)Section 254Section 260

transfer of the reserves and surplus to the holding company by avoiding the payment of tax and therefore it will be treated as a colourable device. There are two aspects in this transaction- (i) It is a simple and plain transaction of buy back of shares without having any dispute of price then the same is beyond the scope

M. NARAYANAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/14620/2014HC Karnataka30 Sept 2015

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

price of the liquor being sold to the customers depending upon the varying degree of facilities provided by them to the customers. 28. The Legislature has inserted Entry 59A in the III Schedule to KVAT Act and has chosen to provide for levy of tax on liquor sold by certain licence holders. Notification – II bearing No.FD 21 CSL 2014 dated

FEDERATION OF WINES MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/13078/2014HC Karnataka30 Sept 2015

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

price of the liquor being sold to the customers depending upon the varying degree of facilities provided by them to the customers. 28. The Legislature has inserted Entry 59A in the III Schedule to KVAT Act and has chosen to provide for levy of tax on liquor sold by certain licence holders. Notification – II bearing No.FD 21 CSL 2014 dated

SRI M MADHAVA GOWDA vs. UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

WP/27825/2014HC Karnataka30 Sept 2015

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

price of the liquor being sold to the customers depending upon the varying degree of facilities provided by them to the customers. 28. The Legislature has inserted Entry 59A in the III Schedule to KVAT Act and has chosen to provide for levy of tax on liquor sold by certain licence holders. Notification – II bearing No.FD 21 CSL 2014 dated

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5 vs. M/S NOVELL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PVT.LTD.

In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal

ITA/271/2017HC Karnataka16 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 14ASection 260Section 260ASection 40Section 9

1)(vi) of the Act? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in setting aside disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act without the same is made in accordance with Rule 8D of I.T. Rules?". Thereafter, additional substantial question of law was formulated which reads as under: "Whether the direction

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SHASTHA PHARMA LABORATORIES

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/331/2007HC Karnataka27 Nov 2013

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 260Section 45Section 45(4)

price of Rs.50.12/- lakhs did not amount to a transfer and consequently, no capital gains tax was liable to be paid.?” 7. However, before commencement of the arguments, learned Counsel for the revenue sought the permission of the Court to raise additional substantial question of law : “Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding the reopening of assessment under Sections

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ING VYSYA BANK LTD

In the result, this appeal is allowed in part,

ITA/2886/2005HC Karnataka06 Jun 2012

Bench: B.MANOHAR,D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR

Section 143Section 260Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(2)Section 80M

50% of the balance. If 12 the expenditure spent by the assessee-Bank in respect of the expenses incurred on its employees who had accompanied the guests is also to be taken as entertainment expenditure, the restriction in this statutory provision operates otherwise the assessee can claim the entire expenditure by way of deduction in terms of Section 37(1

L. VENKATARAMANA RAJU vs. UNION OF INDIA

WP/53718/2017HC Karnataka21 Apr 2022

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

Section 96

50 YEARS, 4. V.BADARINARAYAN S/O. L. VENKATARAMANA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, PETITIONERS 1 TO 4 ARE ALL R/AT NO.76, RANGA RAO ROAD, SHANKARAPURAM, BENGALURU-560 004. 5. V. GEETHA D/O. L.VENKATARAMANA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, W/O. M.S.CHANDRESHAKARA RAJU, R/AT FLAT NO.2A, KARANJI APARTMENTS, WEST ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU-560 004. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI P.N.RAJESWARA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1