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.

3 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 64clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,659Mumbai1,511Bangalore678Chennai358Ahmedabad341Karnataka318Kolkata272Jaipur265Hyderabad233Surat171Pune165Chandigarh158Indore143Cochin121Calcutta55Rajkot49Visakhapatnam45Cuttack40Raipur31SC30Telangana30Lucknow28Nagpur24Guwahati24Jodhpur14Amritsar8Varanasi5Patna5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN4Agra4Ranchi3Dehradun3Rajasthan3Allahabad2Kerala2Panaji1Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 1474Section 143(3)3Section 1483Transfer Pricing2

TATA CUMMINS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1-JAMSHEDPUR AND THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 430/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaytata Cummins Private Limited, D.C.I.T., Cummins India Office, Tower-A, 7Th Circle-1, Vs. Floor, Survey No. 21, Balewadi, Pune, Jamshedpur. Maharashtra. Pan No. Aaact 6353 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

transfer pricing adjustment in respect of such transaction Chapter X does not arise and therefore, question (3) is answered in the negative and in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue." vi. Bausch & Lomb Eyecare India Pvt Ltd [ITA 63/2014] The relevant extract for the same is as follows: "There is merit in the contention of the Assessee that

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

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

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

64,429/- being Rs.20,53,221/- had made without considering the fact that the asessee itself has disallowed Rs.,2,27,69,056/-. In the ground, the assessee has prayed for reduction of the disallowance of 5% on the balance amount after reducing the disallowance made by the assessee. It was the submission that consequently, itis a total disallowance

OM PRAAKSH SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 361/RAN/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Om Prakash Singh Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi Sankalp, East Jail Road, Ranchi- 834001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agkps0300D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manjit Verma, A/RFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Mohanti, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234CSection 263Section 37(1)

64,39,650/-. Subsequently it was noticed that the assessee had debited Rs. 26,25,455/- towards purchase of Bitumen from M/s 1OCL and payments were made on Cash basis exceeding Rs. 20,000/- which is not an allowable expenditure. The assessee had also debited Security Deposit in the Profit and Loss account amounting to Rs. 26,57,044/- which