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.

5,325 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 4(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi5,464Mumbai5,325Bangalore2,044Chennai1,136Kolkata970Ahmedabad833Karnataka802Pune788Hyderabad778Jaipur482Surat326Chandigarh320Indore287Cochin245Visakhapatnam143Rajkot139SC132Telangana110Lucknow92Nagpur89Cuttack87Calcutta74Raipur72Amritsar55Jodhpur38Agra38Guwahati38Dehradun37A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN17Jabalpur16Ranchi15Rajasthan14Panaji13Varanasi13Kerala12Allahabad12Patna11Orissa9Punjab & Haryana4Andhra Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1S.B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1DIPAK MISRA V. GOPALA GOWDA1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)62Addition to Income57Disallowance36Section 14A28Transfer Pricing27Section 115J24Deduction24Section 4021Section 271(1)(c)21

FRANKLIN TEMPLETON INTERNATIONAL SERVICES (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 6(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1495/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2026AY 2010-11
Section 133(6)Section 92D

1,49,70,496.\nThe Appellant prays that the AO be directed to grant relief in respect of\nlevy of interest under section 234B of the Act, in consequence to relief\ngranted in respect of the aforesaid grounds of appeal.\nGround 4 - Levy of interest under section 234D of the Act - The\nsaid ground is consequential in nature\n4.1

DCIT, CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 2243/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 92CSection 92C(3)

4),\nMumbai\n(Appellant)\nPresent for:\nAssessee\nRevenue\nDate of Hearing\nDate of Pronouncement\nof\nTata Consultancy Services\nLimited\n9th Floor, Nirmal Building\nVs. Nariman Point,\nMumbai - 400021\n(PAN: AAACR4849R)\n(Respondent)\n: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate\nand Shri Manish Kumar Kanth, Advocate\n: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR\n: 14.10.2025\n: 30.12.2025\nORDER\nPER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

Showing 1–20 of 5,325 · Page 1 of 267

...
Section 26320
Section 25018
Section 6818

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2493/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 8084/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(2), MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 5227/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 3811/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

ASST CIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 3691/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 8120/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 3597/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 3267/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

ACIT CEN CIR 13, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 7511/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

DCIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2815/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

4) of the Act on account of adjustment in Arm's Length Price (ALP) pursuant to order of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing 1(3), Mumbai (TPO), u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act dated 21st October 2011 in respect of the following transactions: (i) Adjustment of Rs. 1,27,40,126/-in respect of goods sold

INCOME TAX OFFICER-25(3)(5), MUMBAI vs. NILIMA ABHIJIT TANNU, MUMBAI

ITA 5923/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Bharti Singh, DRFor Respondent: Shri Vignesh Palkar
Section 1Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 54F

transfer of the original asset took place, or which is not utilized by him for the purchase or construction of the new asset before the date of furnishing the return of income under section 139, shall be deposited by him before furnishing such return. It was submitted that such deposit being made in any case not later than

FIRMENICH AROMATICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 9(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2590/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafnaa/wFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

1 crore is without any basis. Thus, it is very much clear that the determination of arm's length price by the Transfer Pricing Officer is not as per any one of the methods prescribed under section 92C of the Act r/w rule 10B. As discussed elsewhere in this order, such determination of arm's length price

ACCENTURE SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7686/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwallaa/wFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 92C

1,83,27,826, was treated as the adjustment made to the arm's length price. 49. Being aggrieved of such adjustment, the assessee raised objections before the DRP. However, the DRP concurred with the view of the Transfer Pricing Officer. 50. The learned Sr. Counsel for the assessee submitted, since, a part of the services rendered under the IPSA

GOLDMAN SACHS (INDIA) SECURITIES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T. RG.3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 6912/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C(2)

1. In making an upward transfer pricing adjustment of Rs. 946,786,679 in determining the arms length pricing (ALP) of the international transactions pertaining to (a) investment advisory services in respect of listed Indian equities; (b) Investment advisory/support services in respect of strategic (unlisted) investments and (c) Investment banking services, provided by the Appellant to its overseas associated Enterprises

FIRMENICH AROMATICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 9(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6081/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G Manjunatha () & Shri Ravish Sood () Firmenich Aromatics (India) Vs Acit-9(3)(1), Mumbai Pvt Ltd, 9Th Floor, Arena Space, Cts 20, New Shyam Nagar Road, Behind Majas Bus Depot, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai. Pan : Aaacf1621M Appellant Respondednt

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Transfer Pricing Officer certainly cannot determine the arm's length price on ad–hoc / estimation basis. Our reasoning in paragraph 11 to 15 will equally apply to this issue also. Accordingly, we delete the adjustment made to the arm's length price of payment made towards availing information system services from AE. This ground is allowed.” “Facts relating

JSW ENERGY LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TRANSFER PRICING) 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1223/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Us Is A Public Company Engaged In The Business Of Generation Of Power & Operation & Maintenance Of The Power Plants, As Also Other Allied Activities. During The Course Of Its Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Made A Reference Under Section 92Ca(1), For Determination Of The Arm‟S Length Price Of The International Transactions & Specified Domestic Transaction Entered Into By The Assessee With Its Associated Enterprises (Aes), To The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Assessment Year 2014-15 Page 2 Of 17

Section 271GSection 92CSection 92D

4. 2017, “to grant us (i.e. the assessee) an adjournment”. However, no adjournment was granted by the Transfer Pricing Officer. As evident from the impugned penalty order, the requisite transfer pricing study was filed on 7th July 2017, and there has been full compliance with the requisitions made by the TPO subsequently. Elaborate submissions were made to explain the delay

VODAFONE INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 884/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2024AY 2011-12
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 234DSection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 40

Section 92CA(3) of the Act proposed, inter alia, the following transfer pricing adjustments: SNo. Additions/Disallowances Amount (INR) 1 Payment of Royalty for brand name and mark 7,97,68,155/- 2 Technology support charges 1,31,43,772/- 3 Payment for GMAC costs, PwC consulting charges and People Survey charges 4

ILJIN ELECTRIC CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) CIR 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

ITA 1023/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accoutant Member & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 234D

1 to 4. In addition, clause 12.1 of the IFB also requires the bidder to quote the price for supplies to be made from abroad in the foreign currency, whereas, the price to be quoted for goods to be supplied within India is to be quoted in Indian currency. It is relevant to mention that the breakdown of price