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.

2 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 49(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,146Mumbai1,946Bangalore792Chennai374Ahmedabad369Karnataka342Kolkata313Jaipur286Hyderabad275Indore183Chandigarh177Pune172Cochin135Surat95Rajkot56Calcutta55Visakhapatnam50SC49Lucknow45Raipur37Cuttack37Telangana32Nagpur32Guwahati25Jodhpur23Amritsar20Agra12Rajasthan8Allahabad7Varanasi6Ranchi6Dehradun5Kerala5Orissa3Jabalpur3Panaji3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Patna2Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 2635Section 282

M/S KUMAR PIYUSH CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD,NALANDA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

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

ITA 156/PAT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43B

49,527/- but in the computation of income he deducted Rs. 1,38,54,942/- as “retention money”. This action of the assessee allegedly resulted in a loss of Rs. 98,65,419/-. On this issue, the Ld. PCIT noticed that the so called “retention money” was not debited in the P&L Account but was straightway adjusted

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. SH. SURESH , PATNA

ITA 205/PAT/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna27 Jun 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Alok Kumar, Advocate
For Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT D/R
Section 250Section 28Section 54Section 54F

transfer of lands as arose to the assesse. (ii) Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding Rupam Tower as Residential House and has erred in allowing deduction u/s 54 to the LTCG arising to the assessee. (iii) Ld. CIT(A) erred in accepting the claim of the assessee regarding the cost of construction of the Rupam Tower building. He also erred