BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

3 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 10(20)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,785Delhi1,556Hyderabad390Chennai368Bangalore342Ahmedabad230Jaipur194Chandigarh165Kolkata161Indore113Pune96Cochin94Rajkot88Surat68Nagpur50Visakhapatnam47Raipur42Lucknow38Cuttack35Amritsar27Jodhpur23Agra22Guwahati19Dehradun18Panaji7Jabalpur6Patna6Varanasi5Allahabad4Ranchi3

Key Topics

Section 2634Addition to Income3Transfer Pricing2Disallowance2

TIMKEN INDIA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 92/RAN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: BEFORES/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S/Shri K.M.Gupta/Krishan Shaw, ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 234D

transfer pricing is in regard to whetherthe resale price method is to be applied or TNMM method is to be applied. The resale method admittedly has been applies where the assessee purchase of particular product when sale it. The profit margin should be comparable. Now what the assessee purchases is bearing. These bearings are purchased at the instance

M/S USHA MARTIN LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIR-3, RANCHI

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

ITA 68/RAN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: BEFORES/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S/Shri Aditya Hans/Vishal Jain and Ashis JainFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT DR
Section 234Section 244A

section 234 B and 234D, theseare consequential in nature. Consequently, additional grounds raised by the assessee stand disposed as per the above direction. 9. Now coming to the main appeal filed the assessee, Ground No.1 is general in nature and consequently not adjudicated. 10. In Ground No.2, the same has three limbs. In Ground No.2.2, most specifically Ground No.2.2.2

ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY,DHANBAD vs. PR. CIT, DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 11/RAN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

20,900/- (iv) Sand of ₹ 2,94,500/- (v) Steel of ₹ 11,78,852/- (vi) Plumbing material of ₹ 1,61,090/- (vii) Marble & Tiles of ₹ 17,73,356/- (b) Payment made to land owner of ₹ 31,06,375/- (c) Source & Advance of ₹ 10,42,27,450/- received in lieu of allotment of flats. "That the appellant appeared before the PCIT