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.

18 results for “transfer pricing”+ Reopening of Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai518Delhi294Chennai127Jaipur110Hyderabad98Ahmedabad91Bangalore81Cochin67Chandigarh64Rajkot63Indore47Kolkata44Surat25Nagpur24Raipur24Pune24Lucknow22Guwahati18SC18Cuttack11Visakhapatnam10Amritsar8Agra7Patna5Varanasi5Jodhpur2Dehradun2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 118Section 1476Section 144C6Section 80P(4)5Section 104Section 11A4Section 1484Section 1323Depreciation3Addition to Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHELF DRILLING RON TAPPMEYER LIMITED

The appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-010586-010589 - 2025Supreme Court08 Aug 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 44B

assessment, while Section 144 thereof speaks of Best Judgment Assessment. Section 143 of the Act speaks of an assessment made when a return has been filed under Section 139 or in response to a notice under sub- section (1) of Section 142 and the return is processed leading to an assessment order being passed by the Assessing Officer. However when

PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) vs. LALJIBHAI KANJIBHAI MANDALIA

The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the High

3
Exemption2
Capital Gains2
C.A. No.-004081-004081 - 2022Supreme Court13 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)

transferred a sum of Rs. 6 crores on 01.06.2016 and Rs. 4 crores on 21.06.2016 to M/s Goan Recreation Clubs Private Ltd. The assessee secured the loan by way of a mortgage of the property forming part of Survey No. 31/1-A situated in Village Bambolim, Distt. North Goa. It is an admitted fact that the assessee became the Director

A.L.A. FIRM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS

- 0Supreme Court21 Feb 1991
For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS
Section 147Section 148Section 23(2)

price prevalent since 1.1.1954 and that, therefore, no capital gains were chargeable to tax. The I.T.O. followed up his letter by a notice under S. 148 read with S. 147(b). The assessee objected to the reassessment on two grounds: (1) that the circumstances did not justify the initiation of proceedings under S. 147(b); and (2) that no assessable

NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-001008-001008 - 2020Supreme Court03 Apr 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 148

reopening   the   assessment   of   an earlier year on the basis of his findings of fact made on the basis of fresh materials in course of assessment of the next assessment   year.   The   appeal   is   dismissed.   No   order   as   to costs.” 22. A   perusal   of   the   aforesaid   judgments   clearly   shows   that subsequent facts which come to the knowledge of the assessing

M/S. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. (UNIT BHILAI STEEL PLANT) ISPAT BHAWAN . THROUGH ITS SR. MANAGER (F AND A) vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE RAIPUR

C.A. No.-002150-002150 - 2012Supreme Court08 May 2019

Bench: Us. 2. Very Briefly Put, The Question Which We Are Called Upon To Consider & Resolve Is As To Whether Interest Is Payable On The Differential Excise Duty With Retrospective Effect That Become Payable On The Basis Of Escalation Clause Under Section 11Ab Of The Central Excise Act, 1944 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”). 3. In This Batch Of Appeals, We Will Treat C.A. No.2150/2012 As The Leading Case. We Will Refer To The Said Case As The Sail Case. In The Said Case Originally, The Appellant Company Which Is Manufacturer Of Various Products Including Rail

Section 11Section 11A

price. It is undoubtedly the case of the appellant that the SLP carried against the said judgment has been dismissed. We notice that this Court has given no reasons while dismissing the SLP. 25. In India Carbon Ltd. & Ors. vs. State of Assam 1997 (6) SCC 479 there was delay in payment of central sale tax. The appellants were called

DY.COMMR.OF INCOME TAX vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS

- 0Supreme Court03 Dec 2008
Section 11

price can be taken and not the entire amount. 253 Unexplained Stocks Consent decrees passed by the Supreme Court were not challenged by the appellant. 101 Unexplained money/ Deposits in Banks For an amount of Rs. 18.75 crores decree of Special Court in favour of SBI, w.r.t 64.94 and 17.77 crores Bank filing affidavit stating that the amount never transferred

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED

C.A. No.-005409-005409 - 2019Supreme Court25 Jul 2019

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 92C

pricing addition of Rs. 78.97 crores; (ii) Secondly, under the approved scheme of amalgamation, the transferee has assumed the liabilities of the transferor company, including tax liabilities; (iii) Thirdly, the consequence of the scheme of amalgamation approved under Section 394 of the Companies Act 1956 is that the amalgamating company ceased to exist. In Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd., the principle

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHIVAKAMI CO. PVT. LTD

- 0Supreme Court18 Mar 1986
For Respondent: SHIVAKAMI CO. PVT. LTD
Section 12Section 12BSection 12B(1)

reopened the assessment under section 34(1)(b) with a view to assess the capital gain 886 arising on the sale of the shares. As there was some argument as to what the Tribunal actually found, it is better to refer to the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal, inter alia, observed as follows : "Assuming that the sale on 14th

SAHARANPUR ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD. ETC. ETC. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ETC.ETC

- 0Supreme Court15 Jan 1992
For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ETC.ETC
Section 43

transfer 124 of the asset and will not be a wobbling or fluctuating one. [138G-H, 139A] 5.6 There is no difficulty or anomaly resulting from the Revenue’s interpretation in the Calculation of assessable profits under Section 41(2) or the allowances under Section 32(1)(iii). [139B, E] Birmingham Corporation v. Barnes [1935] 3 I.T.R. Supp

COMMISSIONER OF CENTAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX ROHTAK vs. M/S. MERINO PANEL PRODUCT LTD

C.A. No.-006891 - 2018Supreme Court05 Dec 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 2Section 4Section 4(1)Section 4(1)(a)Section 4(1)(b)Section 4(3)(b)

transfer of goods solely to related parties; iv) The show cause notice by the Revenue sought to assess the value of the goods by relying on Rule 11 of the CEVR, read with Rule 4 and Section 4(1)(a) of the CEA. This was contrary to the CBEC Circular and rendered the notice defective and unenforceable; v) Consequently

SHABINA ABRAHAM vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS

C.A. No.-005802-005802 - 2005Supreme Court29 Jul 2015
Section 11Section 11ASection 4(3)(a)

price is the sole consideration for the sale:” (4) For the purposes of this section, - (a) “assessee” means the person who is liable to pay the duty of excise under this Act and includes his agent;” 11. Recovery of sums due to Government. - In respect of duty and any other sums of any kind payable to the Central Government under

M/S. TECHNO SHARES & STOCKS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV

C.A. No.-007780-007781 - 2010Supreme Court09 Sept 2010
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(ii)

reopening of assessment under Section 147 was the claim of depreciation by the assessee on BSE membership card amounting to Rs. 23,65,000/-. The claim of depreciation of the assessee was based on Section 32(1)(ii) which stood inserted by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 w.e.f. 1.4.1999. However, the said Section deals with claim for depreciation of items

M/S QUEEN'S EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY vs. COMMR.OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-005167-005167 - 2008Supreme Court16 Mar 2015

Bench: The Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital, May Be Gleaned From The Facts Of One Of Them, Namely, The Queen’S Educational Society Case. The Appellant Filed Its Return For Assessment Years 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 Showing A Net Surplus Of Rs.6,58,862/- & Rs.7,82,632/- Respectively. Since The Appellant Was Established With The Sole 2

Section 10Section 10(22)Section 260A

price of its services and apply afresh, in which case the application will be duly considered on merits.” 21. It is these orders that were set aside by the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court impugned by the Revenue before us. 22. Section 10(23C)(vi) read with the 3rd and 13th provisos thereto and Section

TATA IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly

C.A. No.-000096-000096 - 1998Supreme Court16 Feb 2000

Bench: Us, Has Imported Certain Equipments & Drawings & Engineering Documents From Siderugia National Of Portugal - A Government Of Portugal Undertaking. It Appears That Some Time In The Year 1981 Italimpianti, Genevo, Italy Supplied Materials, Designs & Engineering Drawings Etc. To Siderugia National Portugal (Hereinafter Snp, For Short) For Setting Up Rolling Mill Project In Portugal. The Supplies Consisted Of Equipments For Blast Furnace, Ld Converter, Steel Plant Bellet Castors, Wire Rod Mills, Torpedo Ladle Cars Etc.. However, Before The Equipments Could Be Installed, Portugal Decided To Join European Economic Community (Eec) Consequent Whereupon Portugal Could Not Have Expanded Its Steel Making Capacity. Snp Decided To Cancel Its Investment Plan & To Sell The Equipments & Materials Which Were Lying Unused

For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, BHUBANESWAR, ORISSA

assess the value of the goods liable to payment of customs duty and thereupon determine the quantum of duty and penalty, if any, for the reasons stated hereinafter. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that it has mainly proceeded on two sets of reasoning for holding against the appellant. Firstly, the Tribunal has examined the applicability

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-008733-008734 - 2018Supreme Court02 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

transfer to the copy/copies any copyright or other marking on the Software or Documentation. d) not use the Software or Documentation for any other purpose than permitted in this Article 20, License or sell or in any manner alienate or part with its possession. e) not use or transfer the Software and/or the Documentation outside India without the written consent

M/S GUZDAR KAJORA COAL-MINES LTD. CALCUTTA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALCUTTA

- 0Supreme Court31 Jul 1972
For Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALCUTTA

reopened by the appellant the Income-tax Officer had a right to see whether there was any justification ,for the departure, that the break up of the valuation in the sale deed was in fact arbitrary and that it was unlikely that the goodwill was provided for in the break up of the valuation in the sale deed. On reference

THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) vs. TIGER GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL II HOLDINGS

C.A. No.-000262-000262 - 2026Supreme Court15 Jan 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

transfer of the CGP share and not by virtue of various clauses of SPA. In a case like the present one, where the structure has existed for a considerable length of time generating taxable revenues right from 1994 and where the court is satisfied that the transaction satisfies all the parameters of “participation in 66 investment” then in such

THE MAVILAYI SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CALICUT

C.A. No.-007343-007350 - 2019Supreme Court12 Jan 2021

Bench: Us, The Assessing Officer Denied Their Claims For Deduction, Relying Upon Section 80P(4) Of The It Act, Holding That As Per The Audited Receipt & 2

Section 147Section 19Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

prices to members. 22. Act as an agent in collection of premium of LIC, rent of electricity board, telecom and other public sector undertakings. 23. To associate more people to the cooperative institutions by organising cooperative education and campaigns. 24.To borrow funds from District Cooperative Banks, Govt and other institutions approved by Registrar. 25. To render services like collection