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.

6 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 195(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi803Mumbai669Bangalore302Karnataka250Chennai197Ahmedabad116Kolkata105Jaipur88Calcutta52Hyderabad51Chandigarh49Pune39Cochin27Rajkot26Indore23Lucknow22Surat13Telangana11SC10Raipur10Nagpur9Cuttack7Visakhapatnam6Varanasi5Allahabad4Guwahati4Agra4Jabalpur3Rajasthan3Orissa2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Jodhpur1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 1328Section 54F5Section 1485Survey u/s 133A5Addition to Income5Section 1474Section 133A4Search & Seizure4Section 143(2)

NATTA SURYA RAO,TANUKU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TANUKU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 404/VIZ/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.404/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2009-10) Natta Suryarao Vs. Income Tax Officer S/O Late Manganna Ward-1 D.No.2-20-5 Tanuku Ambati Vari Street Old Town, Tanuku [Pan :Ahrpn 9648M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri.Y.Ratnakar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Smt.Suman Malik, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04 .10.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri.Y.Ratnakar, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Suman Malik, DR
Section 148Section 45(2)Section 54F

section 2(1-A) being situated within 8 kms. of municipal limits. Transaction was therefore, to realize the maximum from out of the capital asset. Profits, therefore, not income from adventure in the nature of trade but capital gain.” “Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are also of the view that the selling of own land

2

TEEJAY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED.,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 44/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.(Tp).A. No.44/Viz/2017 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2012-13) Teejay India Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Plot No. 15, Brandix India Apparel Income Tax, City Private Limited Sez, Circle-5(1), 2Nd Floor, Direct Pudimadaka Road, Atchutapuram, Taxes Building, Mvp Double Visakhapatnam – 530 011. Road, Visakhapatnam, Pan: Aaaco 9452 H Andhra Pradesh. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Darpan Kirpalani ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri Darpan KirpalaniFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 12Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

195 Operating Cost of the Taxpayer 142,58,91,748 % of AE Sales to total sales 29.67% AE Cost (in proportion to revenues) 42,30,62,082 Arm’s Length Margin determined by 6.11% the TPO Arm’s Length Price = (100 + AALM) x 44,89,11,175 OC Less: Price received 32,00,34,704 Shortfall being the adjustment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD, GUNTUR

ITA 229/VIZ/2025[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Sept 2025
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

195 (SC) N.K.Proteins Ltd\n(earlier N.K.lndustries Ltd) Vs Dy.CIT vide SLP (C) No. 769 of 2017. The\nHon'ble High Court held that 'The Tribunal in the case Of Vijay Proteins\nLtd (Supra) has observed that it would be just and proper to direct the AO\nto restrict the addition in respect of the undisclosed income relating

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD., GUNTUR

ITA 231/VIZ/2025[2022]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Sept 2025
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

195 (SC) N.K.Proteins Ltd\n(earlier N.K.lndustries Ltd) Vs Dy.CIT vide SLP (C) No. 769 of 2017. The\nHon'ble High Court held that 'The Tribunal in the case Of Vijay Proteins\nLtd (Supra) has observed that it would be just and proper to direct the AO\nto restrict the addition in respect of the undisclosed income relating

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD., GUNTUR

ITA 230/VIZ/2025[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Sept 2025
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

195 (SC) N.K.Proteins Ltd\n(earlier N.K.lndustries Ltd) Vs Dy.CIT vide SLP (C) No. 769 of 2017. The\nHon'ble High Court held that 'The Tribunal in the case Of Vijay Proteins\nLtd (Supra) has observed that it would be just and proper to direct the AO\nto restrict the addition in respect of the undisclosed income relating

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT LTD, GUNTUR

ITA 228/VIZ/2025[2019]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Sept 2025
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

195 (SC) N.K.Proteins Ltd\n(earlier N.K.lndustries Ltd) Vs Dy.CIT vide SLP (C) No. 769 of 2017. The\nHon'ble High Court held that 'The Tribunal in the case Of Vijay Proteins\nLtd (Supra) has observed that it would be just and proper to direct the AO\nto restrict the addition in respect of the undisclosed income relating