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.

188 results for “disallowance”+ TP Methodclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai857Delhi850Bangalore704Chennai190Kolkata188Pune167Ahmedabad124Hyderabad91Indore32Jaipur18Karnataka17Visakhapatnam16Chandigarh16Amritsar9Surat9Cochin9Dehradun5Rajkot4Panaji2Cuttack2Guwahati2Ranchi1Raipur1Telangana1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 14A77Section 143(3)74Section 92C68Transfer Pricing55Addition to Income54Disallowance50Comparables/TP34Section 80I29Section 115J27Section 144C(5)

AT&S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KARNATAKA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

ITA 69/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am At&S India Private Limited Vs. Dcit, Circle 11(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 12A, Industrial Area, Nanjangud – 571 301 Kolkata – 700 069. Mysore District, Karnataka, India "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeca 2930 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Anup Sinha & Ms. Rituparna Sinha, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 37(1)Section 92C

disallowance without appreciating that the Ld. AO in the draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with 144C(1) of the Act did not make any adverse comment under section 37 (1) of the Act in respect of the said transaction after examining the details of the said transaction submitted by the appellant to the Ld. TPO and subsequently

Showing 1–20 of 188 · Page 1 of 10

...
25
Deduction19
TP Method19

AT&S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

ITA 77/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.77/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) At & S India (P) Ltd. Vs. D.C.I.T, Circle-11(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Smt. Rituparna Sinha, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 37Section 92C

disallowing the payments aggregating to INR 9,97,50,264/- made by the assessee to its AE for receiving purchase and order handling services and sales services from the Associated Enterprise(‘ AE’).This covers the revised ground Nos. 4 to 8 of the Assessee. 4. We shall take up additions challenged on account of transfer pricing adjustment as has been

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CERATIZIT INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 928/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 928/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05 Acit, Circle-3(1), N.D. -Vs- M/S Ceratizit India Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaccc 2210 P] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 995/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/S Ceratizit India Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-3(1), N.D. [Pan: Aaccc 2210 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjoy Paul, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

TP study report, then also he is not precluded from raising the contention before the TPO or appellate court that such a method was not a proper method and does not result into proper determination of the ALP and some other method should be resorted. The ultimate aim of the TPO to examine whether the price or the margin arising

M/S. CERATIZIT INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 995/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 928/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05 Acit, Circle-3(1), N.D. -Vs- M/S Ceratizit India Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaccc 2210 P] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 995/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/S Ceratizit India Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-3(1), N.D. [Pan: Aaccc 2210 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjoy Paul, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

TP study report, then also he is not precluded from raising the contention before the TPO or appellate court that such a method was not a proper method and does not result into proper determination of the ALP and some other method should be resorted. The ultimate aim of the TPO to examine whether the price or the margin arising

SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 911/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2019AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sika India Pvt. Ltd………………………….……........................................................……………….…......Appellant Commercial Complex-Ii 620, Diamond Harbour Road Kolkata – 700 034 [Pan : Aaecs 1119 F] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(2), Kolkata……..................……….…....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Himanshu Sinha, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 31St, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 30Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(3)

TP Study for the Assessment Year 2011-12, wherein he has used Cost Plus Method for determination of royalty. This is clear from the wherein he has used Cost Plus Method for determination of royalty. This is clear from the wherein he has used Cost Plus Method for determination of royalty. This is clear from the order

LANDIS + GYR LIMITED,SOUTH 24 PARGANAS vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 37/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Mitra, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 43B

disallowance is only on the point that the intellectual properties is not approved by any government or any competent authority. Nowhere the income tax act mandates the registration of the intellectual properties for the purpose of granting depreciation u/s 32 of the Act. Getting the intellectual properties registered is within the domain of the assessee and it only offers protection

M/S LANDIS+GYR LIMITED,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1623/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Mitra, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 43B

disallowance is only on the point that the intellectual properties is not approved by any government or any competent authority. Nowhere the income tax act mandates the registration of the intellectual properties for the purpose of granting depreciation u/s 32 of the Act. Getting the intellectual properties registered is within the domain of the assessee and it only offers protection

M/S. R. S. SOFTWARE (INDIA) LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 741/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am M/S. R.S. Software (India) Ltd. Vs. Acit/Cir-2(2), Kolkata A-2, Fmc Fortuna, 234/3A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kol-20. Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr 7813 G (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Sriram, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14A

TP study report by mistake, then also he is not precluded from raising the contention before the TPO or appellate court that such a method was not a proper method and does not result into proper determination of the ALP and some other method should be resorted. The ultimate aim of the TPO to examine whether the price

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AT & S INDIA LIMITED, KARNATAKA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1311/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 1311/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata M/S. At&S India Ltd. 12A, Industrial Area, Vs Nanjangud Mysore District Karnataka - 571301 Pan : Aaeca2930J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Smt. Rituparna Sinha, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Gaurav Kanaujia, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Manish Borad:

For Appellant: Smt. Rituparna Sinha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Kanaujia, CIT, D/R
Section 250

disallowed the expenditure under section 37 of the I.T. Act but only adopted the ALP determined by the TPO in his order. We find that the principle enunciated by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid case is squarely applicable on the facts of the present case. Hence, we find that the aforesaid action

JASO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 507/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ii) of the Act. 4. We first take up the issue of TP Adjustment. In its TP documentation in the executive summary, the assessee under the head, Brief Business descriptions of the entity, stated as follows:- Brief Business descriptions of the entity Snyopsis of JASO India JASO India is incorporated in India on 2nd July

M/S ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR - 2(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 488/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2075/Kol/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.220 To 222/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 To 2013-14)

For Appellant: Dr. P. K Srihari, CIT(DR) & Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Bikash Chanda, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act, the holding company of the petitioner i.e. M/s ITC Limited made a claim for deduction of education cess before the Hon’ble Tribunal in its appeal for the AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 685/Kol/2014) by filing an additional ground. The Hon’ble Tribunal by an order dated November 27, 2018 received

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 221/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2075/Kol/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.220 To 222/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 To 2013-14)

For Appellant: Dr. P. K Srihari, CIT(DR) & Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Bikash Chanda, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act, the holding company of the petitioner i.e. M/s ITC Limited made a claim for deduction of education cess before the Hon’ble Tribunal in its appeal for the AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 685/Kol/2014) by filing an additional ground. The Hon’ble Tribunal by an order dated November 27, 2018 received

ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIR-2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 552/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2075/Kol/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.220 To 222/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 To 2013-14)

For Appellant: Dr. P. K Srihari, CIT(DR) & Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Bikash Chanda, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act, the holding company of the petitioner i.e. M/s ITC Limited made a claim for deduction of education cess before the Hon’ble Tribunal in its appeal for the AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 685/Kol/2014) by filing an additional ground. The Hon’ble Tribunal by an order dated November 27, 2018 received

M/S. ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 487/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2075/Kol/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.220 To 222/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 To 2013-14)

For Appellant: Dr. P. K Srihari, CIT(DR) & Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Bikash Chanda, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act, the holding company of the petitioner i.e. M/s ITC Limited made a claim for deduction of education cess before the Hon’ble Tribunal in its appeal for the AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 685/Kol/2014) by filing an additional ground. The Hon’ble Tribunal by an order dated November 27, 2018 received

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ITC INFOTECH INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2075/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2075/Kol/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.220 To 222/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 To 2013-14)

For Appellant: Dr. P. K Srihari, CIT(DR) & Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Bikash Chanda, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act, the holding company of the petitioner i.e. M/s ITC Limited made a claim for deduction of education cess before the Hon’ble Tribunal in its appeal for the AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 685/Kol/2014) by filing an additional ground. The Hon’ble Tribunal by an order dated November 27, 2018 received

M/S. ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 486/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2075/Kol/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.220 To 222/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 To 2013-14)

For Appellant: Dr. P. K Srihari, CIT(DR) & Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Bikash Chanda, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act, the holding company of the petitioner i.e. M/s ITC Limited made a claim for deduction of education cess before the Hon’ble Tribunal in its appeal for the AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 685/Kol/2014) by filing an additional ground. The Hon’ble Tribunal by an order dated November 27, 2018 received

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 220/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2075/Kol/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.220 To 222/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 To 2013-14)

For Appellant: Dr. P. K Srihari, CIT(DR) & Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Bikash Chanda, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act, the holding company of the petitioner i.e. M/s ITC Limited made a claim for deduction of education cess before the Hon’ble Tribunal in its appeal for the AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 685/Kol/2014) by filing an additional ground. The Hon’ble Tribunal by an order dated November 27, 2018 received

SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and in appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 393/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

methods and the entire payment made by the assessee for availing the IT support services from its associated enterprise was added as TP adjustment. • In view this, the Tribunal had given the decision that the addition made by A.O./TPO on account of TP adjustments in respect of the international transactions of the assessee company with its AE involving availing

DCIT, CIR-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and in appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 402/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

methods and the entire payment made by the assessee for availing the IT support services from its associated enterprise was added as TP adjustment. • In view this, the Tribunal had given the decision that the addition made by A.O./TPO on account of TP adjustments in respect of the international transactions of the assessee company with its AE involving availing

DCIT, CIRCLE -2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BATA INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 365/KOL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna,CIT
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(6)(va)Section 43B

disallowed the expenditure on the ground that the ALP was ‘Nil’ as no real services had been availed 12 M/s.Bata India Ltd.. A.Yr.2004-05 by the assessee and the arrangement was not genuine. On further appeal by the Assessee, the Tribunal held as follows: “8. We find that the basic reason of the Transfer Pricing Officer’s determination