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.

9 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 13(1)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,157Delhi3,734Bangalore1,778Chennai916Kolkata689Ahmedabad619Hyderabad467Karnataka459Pune395Jaipur305Indore263Surat260Chandigarh241Cochin207Visakhapatnam123SC100Rajkot91Cuttack80Nagpur63Calcutta61Lucknow60Telangana54Raipur42Agra34Guwahati33Jodhpur28Amritsar26Dehradun23A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN15Ranchi13Jabalpur11Rajasthan10Varanasi10Kerala9Panaji9Allahabad8Orissa5Patna3Punjab & Haryana2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1DIPAK MISRA V. GOPALA GOWDA1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 43B21Addition to Income8Section 143(3)6Section 1156Section 92C6Section 2636Deduction5Disallowance3Transfer Pricing3

SHREE AMBEY FORGING PRIVAT LIMITED,PANAJI vs. ITO, WARD - (4), PANAJI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 389/PAN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Oct 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Shrinivas Nayak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 92ASection 92C

E R Per Bench : These two appeals have been filed by the assessee on the following grounds :- 1) The order of the learned AO is bad in law and is void-ab-initio. 2) The Assessment Order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s 92CA & r.w.s 144(C) of the Income Tax Act'1961 is without jurisdiction, misconceived

SCORPIO IRON LTD,PANAJI vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), PANAJI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Section 144C(5)2
Section 43(5)2
Section 362
ITA 388/PAN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Oct 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Shrinivas Nayak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 92ASection 92C

E R Per Bench : These two appeals have been filed by the assessee on the following grounds :- 1) The order of the learned AO is bad in law and is void-ab-initio. 2) The Assessment Order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s 92CA & r.w.s 144(C) of the Income Tax Act'1961 is without jurisdiction, misconceived

GUALA CLOSURES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,PANAJI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI., SELECT CITY

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 205/PAN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Shivshankar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144(3)Section 144CSection 253Section 263Section 4

Transfer Pricing Officer or any other authority; (e) records relating to the draft order; (f) evidence collected by, or caused to be collected by, it; and (g) result of any enquiry made by, or caused to be made by, it. 17 ITA.No.205/PAN./2019 (7) The Dispute Resolution Panel may, before issuing any directions referred to in sub-section

BEIERSDORF INDIA (P) LTD.,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(4),, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 337/PAN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh D.E. Robinson, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 28Section 36Section 43Section 43(5)

transfer of such warehouse receipts, by the broker. The payouts being made by the clearing house on settlement dates. The difference between the selling price and cost price of the commodities after deduction of brokerage was the income arising from this activity. It is not disputed by the AO that such income has been returned as business income

GUALA CLOSURES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,PANAJI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), PANAJI

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

ITA 344/PAN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 Apr 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A.No.344/Pan/2017 (A.Y.2013-14 ) Guala Closures(India) Vs. I T O Ward1(1), Private Limited, Aaykar Bhavan, D-1, Sesa Ghor, Edc, Patto, 20,Edc Complex, Panjim-403001. Patto, Goa. Panaji-403001, Goa Pan/Gir No.:Aaacg4447J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Niraj Sheth. ARFor Respondent: Shri.Renga Ranjan.CIT DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 2(43)Section 4Section 90

E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The assesse has filed the appeal against the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed in pursuance to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) u/s 144C(5) of the Act. The assesse has Guala Closures (India) Private Limited. raised

GUALA CLOSURES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,PANAJI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PANAJI., PANAJI

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

ITA 62/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A.No.62/Pan/2017 (A.Y.2012-13 ) Guala Closures(India) Vs. I T O Ward1(1), Private Limited, Aaykar Bhavan, D-1, Seasa Ghor, Edc, Patto, 20,Edc Complex, Panjim-403001. Patto, Goa. Panaji-403001, Goa Pan/Gir No.:Aaacg4447J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Nirajsheth. ARFor Respondent: Shri.Satish M .CIT DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The assesse has filed the appeal against the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed in pursuance to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) u/s 144C(5) of the Act. The assesse has IT(TP)A No. 67/PAN/2017 Guala

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SALITHO ORES PVT. LTD, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 99/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1, Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Margao Panaji, Goa. Pan: Aabcs 8859 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ, DR
Section 43B

E R Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: The appeal in ITA No. 72/PAN/2018 preferred by the assessee and the appeals in ITA Nos.99 & 100/PAN/2018 preferred by the Revenue emanates from the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Panaji, (for short, ‘CIT(A)’) dated ITA Nos.72, 99 & 100/PAN/2018 M/s.Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd. 28/12/2017, 26/12/2017 & 26/12/2017 for A.Ys

M/S SALITHO ORES PRIVATE LIMITED,PANAJI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - M1, MARGAO

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 72/PAN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1, Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Margao Panaji, Goa. Pan: Aabcs 8859 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ, DR
Section 43B

E R Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: The appeal in ITA No. 72/PAN/2018 preferred by the assessee and the appeals in ITA Nos.99 & 100/PAN/2018 preferred by the Revenue emanates from the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Panaji, (for short, ‘CIT(A)’) dated ITA Nos.72, 99 & 100/PAN/2018 M/s.Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd. 28/12/2017, 26/12/2017 & 26/12/2017 for A.Ys

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SALITHO ORES PVT. LTD, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 100/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1, Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Margao Panaji, Goa. Pan: Aabcs 8859 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ, DR
Section 43B

E R Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: The appeal in ITA No. 72/PAN/2018 preferred by the assessee and the appeals in ITA Nos.99 & 100/PAN/2018 preferred by the Revenue emanates from the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Panaji, (for short, ‘CIT(A)’) dated ITA Nos.72, 99 & 100/PAN/2018 M/s.Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd. 28/12/2017, 26/12/2017 & 26/12/2017 for A.Ys