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.

32 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 80Gclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi104Mumbai96Bangalore55Chennai33Kolkata32Chandigarh25Pune24Ahmedabad18Hyderabad17Lucknow11Rajkot11Jaipur7Indore7Ranchi6Cuttack5Agra3Cochin3Jodhpur2Amritsar2Visakhapatnam2Nagpur1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 14A19Section 92C18Transfer Pricing17Addition to Income15Section 115J13Section 143(3)13Section 80G12Section 8011Limitation/Time-bar11

M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1875/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92C(3)

transfer pricing proceedings when the facts of the case including the underlying arguments have not altered. 4. Non-grant of deduction under section 80G

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD , KOLKATA

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

Section 80I10
Disallowance9
Deduction9

In the result all the four appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1079/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, &For Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR
Section 80Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer adopted ₹4.96/Kwh for benchmarking these domestic transactions with the AEs thereby making an adjustment of ₹44,83,27,538/-. Accordingly, the assessment was framed by the learned ld. AO making this addition. The learned CIT (A) while passing the order, has followed the decision of the Coordinate Bench in ITA No. 1672/KOL/2019

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD , KOLKATA

In the result all the four appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1081/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, &For Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR
Section 80Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer adopted ₹4.96/Kwh for benchmarking these domestic transactions with the AEs thereby making an adjustment of ₹44,83,27,538/-. Accordingly, the assessment was framed by the learned ld. AO making this addition. The learned CIT (A) while passing the order, has followed the decision of the Coordinate Bench in ITA No. 1672/KOL/2019

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD , KOLKATA

In the result all the four appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1082/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, &For Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR
Section 80Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer adopted ₹4.96/Kwh for benchmarking these domestic transactions with the AEs thereby making an adjustment of ₹44,83,27,538/-. Accordingly, the assessment was framed by the learned ld. AO making this addition. The learned CIT (A) while passing the order, has followed the decision of the Coordinate Bench in ITA No. 1672/KOL/2019

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD , KOLKATA

In the result all the four appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1080/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, &For Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR
Section 80Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Officer adopted ₹4.96/Kwh for benchmarking these domestic transactions with the AEs thereby making an adjustment of ₹44,83,27,538/-. Accordingly, the assessment was framed by the learned ld. AO making this addition. The learned CIT (A) while passing the order, has followed the decision of the Coordinate Bench in ITA No. 1672/KOL/2019

M/S. PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY PHILIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LITD.),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 12(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2489/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2489/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Philips India Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [Pan: Aabcp 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D(1)

price for Software Segment 5.1. The Learned AO, TPO and DRP erred in making an adjustment to the ALP of international transactions relating to software development services rendered by the Appellant and in not accepting the ALP of the international transaction as recorded in the books of accounts by the Appellant. 5.2. Without prejudice to the generality of the above

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

ITA 1899/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

Transfer Pricing Officer (Ld. TPO) (in pursuance to the directions of the Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (Ld. DRP), erred in not accepting the returned income of the Appellant under normal provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) amounting to Rs. 2,21,33,99,386/- and enhancing the same by Rs. 5,80,32,672/- and also erred

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

ITA 1854/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

Transfer Pricing Officer (Ld. TPO) (in pursuance to the directions of the Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (Ld. DRP), erred in not accepting the returned income of the Appellant under normal provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) amounting to Rs. 2,21,33,99,386/- and enhancing the same by Rs. 5,80,32,672/- and also erred

M/S PHILLIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 612/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 612/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Philips India Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [Pan: Aabcp 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D(1)

transfer pricing of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The claim of the Ld. AR is that the AMP transaction does not represent the international transaction between the AE’s therefore no question of determining the ALP of AMP transactions. We find force in the argument of the ld. AR in the given facts and circumstances. Therefore, in our considered view

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1960/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Mar 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am M/S Philips India Limited Dcit, Circle 11(1) 3Rd Floor, Tower-A, Dlf Park, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 08 Block Af, Major Arterial Chowringhee Square, Road, New Town (Rajarhat), Vs. Kolkata-700069, Kolkata-700156, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp9487A Assessee By : Shri Ketan Ved, Ar Revenue By : Shri A. Kundu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Kundu, CIT DR
Section 92Section 92C

transfer pricing adjustment stands deleted. Consequently, ground nos. 6 the assessee’s appeal stand allowed. 023. The issue raised in ground no.7, is against the disallowance of expenses of ₹7,50,50,000/- u/s 14A of the Act in relation to earning of exempt income. 024. The facts in brief are that during the year under consideration, the appellant

M/S TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, DELHI AND KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2565/KOL/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Tdk India Private Limited Dcit, Circle 11(1), Kolkata Wbidc Growth Centre, Kulia Aayakar Bhawan, P-7 Kanchrapara Road, Po Ns Chowringhee Square, Sanatorium,Kalyani, Nadia, Vs. 6Th Floor, Roomno.18, Kolkata-741251, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci6950Q Assessee By : Shri Arjit Chakraborthy, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Arjit Chakraborthy, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR

Transfer Pricing Officer/ Hon'ble DRP 1. 2011-12 Approach accepted by TPO - No adjustment done TNMM 2. 2012-13 Approach accepted by TPO - No adjustment done TNMM 3. 2013-14 Approach accepted by TPO - No adjustment done TNMM 4. 2014-15 Approach accepted by TPO - No adjustment done TNMM 5. 2015-16 Adjustment deleted by TPO post DRP Direction

PRAMOD LAKRA,DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILIPS CARBON BLACK LTD , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2459/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

Price as defined in clause (4) of Section 92f of the Act, where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to Section 92BA. The Ld. D.R has further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has further committed wrong in not appreciating the fact that the assessee is generating unit [CPP] account as such claim

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2458/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

Price as defined in clause (4) of Section 92f of the Act, where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to Section 92BA. The Ld. D.R has further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has further committed wrong in not appreciating the fact that the assessee is generating unit [CPP] account as such claim

PCBL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2034/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

Price as defined in clause (4) of Section 92f of the Act, where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to Section 92BA. The Ld. D.R has further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has further committed wrong in not appreciating the fact that the assessee is generating unit [CPP] account as such claim

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2456/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

Price as defined in clause (4) of Section 92f of the Act, where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to Section 92BA. The Ld. D.R has further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has further committed wrong in not appreciating the fact that the assessee is generating unit [CPP] account as such claim

PRAMOD LAKRA,DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2457/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

Price as defined in clause (4) of Section 92f of the Act, where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to Section 92BA. The Ld. D.R has further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has further committed wrong in not appreciating the fact that the assessee is generating unit [CPP] account as such claim

ACIT, CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. M.K. SHAH EXPORTS LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appealof the Revenue (ITA No

ITA 1974/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1903/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 020. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1974/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata Vs. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 069. Kolkata – 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By :Shrisaurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit (Sr. Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2018

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: ShriSaurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80GSection 92C

80G of the Act in respect of donation given by the assessee in accordance with law. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee ( In ITA No.1903/K/2017, for A.Y. 2013-14), is allowed 11. Now we shall take Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 1974/Kol/2017, for A.Y. 2013-14, wherein grievances raised by the Revenue are as follows

M/S. M. K. SHAH EXPORTS LTD,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appealof the Revenue (ITA No

ITA 1903/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1903/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 020. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1974/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata Vs. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 069. Kolkata – 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By :Shrisaurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit (Sr. Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2018

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: ShriSaurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80GSection 92C

80G of the Act in respect of donation given by the assessee in accordance with law. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee ( In ITA No.1903/K/2017, for A.Y. 2013-14), is allowed 11. Now we shall take Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 1974/Kol/2017, for A.Y. 2013-14, wherein grievances raised by the Revenue are as follows

M/S PHILIPS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1068/KOL/2015[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 1068/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92

80G of the Act amounting to Rs. 46,65,128 without appreciating the fact that the same was allowed by the Ld. AO in the final assessment order dated 30 July 20 I 0 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Act. 8. Erroneous levy of interest under section 220(2) of the Act That on the facts

ITO, WARD - 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. JOSAN DEPOSITS & ADVANCES PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2096/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 68

80G, Section 88 and various other section which were relevant for the purpose of interpretation of the word “sum” and cash credit. Same has been reiterated and underlined by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Amonbolu Rajaiyah in 102 ITR 423; The Allahabad High Court in the case of Saru Smelting and Refining