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.

3 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 260Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi540Mumbai130Karnataka74Kolkata57Calcutta54Chennai33Telangana24Jaipur22Bangalore19Ahmedabad12SC11Dehradun10Surat7Nagpur7Pune6Lucknow5Hyderabad5Amritsar4Indore4Chandigarh3Kerala3Allahabad3Orissa2Cochin2Visakhapatnam1Andhra Pradesh1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Jodhpur1Rajasthan1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 260A2Section 143(2)2Section 2(14)2Section 92C2Section 143(3)2Deduction2

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. APOLLO TYRES LTD

Appeal is allowed in part as indicated

ITA/44/2017HC Kerala22 Sept 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

For Appellant: M/S. APOLLO TYRES LTDFor Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 35Section 43ASection 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer-1, Kochi, made the order under Section 92CA(3) ITA No.44/2017 -3- of the Act. The Assessing Officer through Annexure-B draft assessment order dated 28.03.2014 proposed to finalize the income tax return of the assessee assessed total income as Rs.481,78,02,530/-. The assessee raised objections to the draft assessment order dated 28.03.2014. The issues

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOCHI vs. M/S.COCHIN MALABAR ESTATES & INDUSTRIES LTD.

ITA/179/2014HC Kerala28 Oct 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

Section 143(2)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 260A

260A of the Act. He prays for dismissing the appeal. 7. Let us now examine the broad tests/guidelines laid by the judicial precedents. Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat-II v. Siddharth J. Desai8 evolved thirteen factors/indicators which a case has to answer for being treated as agricultural land or non-agricultural land. The thirteen factors

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. USHA MURUGAN

ITA/18/2017HC Kerala23 Jun 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

Section 143(2)Section 260A

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam (for short 'the Revenue') is the appellant in these Tax Appeals. M/s.Meenakshy Enterprises, a proprietary concern, represented by T. Murugan, since deceased, represented by his wife Usha Murugan, is the respondent in these appeals (for short referred to as 'the assessee