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.

4 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 58clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,947Mumbai1,762Bangalore644Karnataka622Ahmedabad348Chennai332Kolkata269Hyderabad267Jaipur260Pune179Indore139Cochin125Chandigarh118Surat112Lucknow57Calcutta56Telangana49Rajkot48Cuttack43Raipur41Visakhapatnam36SC34Agra26Nagpur21Dehradun18Amritsar11Jodhpur9Ranchi8Allahabad6Varanasi5Orissa4Panaji4Guwahati3Rajasthan3Patna2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Punjab & Haryana1Jabalpur1Kerala1Andhra Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

BARUNEI ROLLER FLOUR MILL (P) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 1

In the result, the award of the maximum uniform rate for the

ITA/1/2022HC Orissa03 Nov 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI (ACJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Transfer of Property Act, to advance the argument that the price component in a sale is an intrinsic and integral part of the transaction and a sale cannot exist without the price component and the price component in a sale transaction cannot be independent, whereas for a ‘collateral purpose’ it should be something i.e. independent and divisible from the main

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.AHINSA VINIMAY PVT.LTD.

ITA/132/2018HC Orissa05 Apr 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 260

Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial question of law. On the other hand, the appeals

M/S.SHEETAL REAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial questions of law

ITA/83/2010HC Orissa08 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 372A

price during this period was phenomenal and none of the companies have declared any dividend. The CIT(A) drew adverse inference against the assessee noting the volume and frequency of the transactions. The CIT(A) came to the conclusion that the assessee was actually engaged actively in share transactions, they had a full-fledged shares Department

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,BHUBANESWAR vs. SEKHAR KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ITA/9/2024HC Orissa15 Apr 2024

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Prashant Vidyarthy, Sr. Panel Counsel
Section 164Section 42

58,700/- towards the consideration amount of flat. The agreement to sale dated 03.08.2009 itself shows that the purchaser was handed over possession of the property on 08.10.2007 by the developer. The payments were made through demand drafts which also finds mention in the income tax returns Form-26AS during the said period of the appellant. It is further submitted