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.

37 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 80Iclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai15Delhi13Chandigarh2Chennai2Bangalore2Cochin1Ahmedabad1Kolkata1

Key Topics

Section 80I69Section 143(3)33Section 8029Deduction27Addition to Income25Section 92C21Section 10A18Section 80H14Section 143(2)12Disallowance

DCIT(CC)-8(3), MUMBAI vs. JSW ENERGY LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years under consideration stands partly allowed and cross appeals filed by the assesse stands dismissed

ITA 2365/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

transfer of goods and services is in consonance with the price available in the open market then the profits of the eligible business shown as per this price is eligible for deduction and in that case the second option may not be necessary. 13.9. It is noted that Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Tata Chemicals

M/S. TATA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT2(3) (1) - , MUMBAI

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

ITA 468/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Showing 1–20 of 37 · Page 1 of 2

12
Section 28
Exemption8
Section 143
Section 234
Section 234B
Section 80

transfer pricing provision for determining the arm‟s length price. 16 M/s. Tata Chemicals Ltd. 14. The entire case of the department is that, since it is SDT in term of Section 80I

DCM SHRIRAM LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 2587/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

price of steam at cost.\nThis order has been accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has\nbeen filed. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the\ndetermination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible unit to non\neligible unit.\n44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner of\nIncome

DCM SHRIRAM LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

ITA 4328/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

price of steam at cost.\nThis order has been accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has\nbeen filed. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the\ndetermination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible unit to non\neligible unit.\n44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner of\nIncome

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. DCM SHRIRAM LTD, NEW DELHI

ITA 927/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

price of steam at cost.\nThis order has been accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has\nbeen filed. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the\ndetermination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible unit to non\neligible unit.\n\n44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner of\nIncome

KBS CREATION LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMM. OF INCOME TAX -CIRCLE 24(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the concise ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6477/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 80ISection 92C

transfer pricing provisions is bad in law. The assessee is also stated that AO referred the matter to TPO in respect of SDT without demonstrating that business affairs of the assessee with the closely connected entity has been so arranged having risen to more than the ordinary profit of the assessee. The assessee by refereeing sub-section (10) of section

K.R.PULP AND PAPERS LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4456/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80ISection 92C

price of steam at cost. This order has\nbeen accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has been\n\nfiled. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the\ndetermination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible\nunit to non eligible unit.\n\n44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner\nof Income

DEV PRIYA PRODUCTS PRIVATE LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4433/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2020-21] Dev Priya Products Pvt.Ltd., Vs Dcit/Acit, 4, Shankar Vihar, 1St Floor, Central Circle, Vikas Marg, Delhi-110092. Meerut Pan-Aaacd4276C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Shri Ayush Garg, Ca Respondent By Shri S.K.Jhadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 02.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2025 Order

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 80I

price of steam at cost. This order has been accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has been filed. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the determination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible unit to non eligible unit. 44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner of Income

K R PULP AND PAPERS LTD. ,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-19 , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 755/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80ISection 92C

price of steam at cost. This order has\nbeen accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has been\nfiled. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the\ndetermination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible\nunit to non eligible unit.\n44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner\nof Income

M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1875/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92C(3)

transfer of ownership or the provision of use of rights regarding land use, copyrights, patents, trademarks, licences, franchises, customer list, marketing channel, brand, commercial secret, know-how, industrial property right, exterior design or practical and new design or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature; (c) capital financing, including any type of long-term or short-term borrowing

ACIT (CIR.) - 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BHANDAR POWER LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1908/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner Of Bhandar Power Ltd. Income Tax, 14Th Floor, Essar House, Circle 6(1)(2), 11, K. K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai - 400034 (Pan: Aaacb6693B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta, Fca & Shri Tarang Mehta, Advocate Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Delhi, Vide Order Dated 25.01.2018 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Ito 6(1)(4), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 20.12.2016, For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Of Deduction U/S 80Ia Of The Income Tax Act Of Rs. 203,13,43,740/-Without Considering The Fact That The Provisions Of Section 801A(10) Is Clearly Attracted In This Case Hence The Assessee Is Not Eligible For Claiming Deduction U/S 801A Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, FCA and Shri Tarang Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 801ASection 801A(10)Section 80I

transfer pricing provision brought under the Act to cover SDT for determining its ALP, which undisputedly in the present case of the assessee, has been held to be at ALP by the ld. TPO vide order passed u/s.92CA(3) already extracted above. 9.1. At this juncture, it is extremely important to understand the nuances of power business and its regulatory

HINDUSTHAN UNILEVER LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT RANGE 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 6783/MUM/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2024AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar a/wFor Respondent: \nShri Azhar Zain Vayal Parambath
Section 80HSection 80I

80I of the Act and restored\nthe issue to the file of AO with the instruction to follow the directions given\nin AY 2006-07 with regard to allocation of common expenses incurred at\nthe Head Office. It is also pertinent to note that the Co-ordinate Bench\nhas also accepted the plea of the assessee that certain “common income

DCIT 1 (1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 6913/MUM/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2024AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar a/wFor Respondent: \nShri Azhar Zain Vayal Parambath
Section 80HSection 80I

80I of the Act and restored\nthe issue to the file of AO with the instruction to follow the directions given\nin AY 2006-07 with regard to allocation of common expenses incurred at\nthe Head Office. It is also pertinent to note that the Co-ordinate Bench\nhas also accepted the plea of the assessee that certain “common income

ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 465/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115Section 32Section 32ASection 80I

80I-A by sections 80-IA and 80-IB of the Income-tax Act. The substituted section 80-IA, inter alia, in sub-section (12) provides that where any undertaking of an Indian company entitled to the deduction under this section is transferred to another Indian company in a scheme of amalgamation or demerger before the expiry of the specified

DY CIT CC 1(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 931/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115Section 32Section 32ASection 80I

80I-A by sections 80-IA and 80-IB of the Income-tax Act. The substituted section 80-IA, inter alia, in sub-section (12) provides that where any undertaking of an Indian company entitled to the deduction under this section is transferred to another Indian company in a scheme of amalgamation or demerger before the expiry of the specified

MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CC- 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for A

ITA 5092/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: ShriAshok Bansal
Section 35Section 801CSection 80I

80I deduction under section 80IB / 80IC for allocation of re C for allocation of research and development expenses and disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC for development expenses and disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC for development expenses and disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC for inter unit transfer of material. inter unit transfer of material. 11. In this year also also

DCIT , CC- 2(4), MUMBAI vs. MACELODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for A

ITA 5168/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: ShriAshok Bansal
Section 35Section 801CSection 80I

80I deduction under section 80IB / 80IC for allocation of re C for allocation of research and development expenses and disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC for development expenses and disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC for development expenses and disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC for inter unit transfer of material. inter unit transfer of material. 11. In this year also also

SHRI.PRAKASH R. NAIR,KOLLAM vs. DCIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 141/COCH/2021[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasprakash R. Nair Dy.Cit, Central Circle Prop. Dhanya Foods Kollam Kochuppilammoodu Vs. Kollam 691001 [Pan:Abfpn4424P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 148(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80Section 801A(9)Section 80HSection 80I

section 801A(9); iv. Deduction under sec. 80HHC was re-worked; v. Addition on account of under-pricing of sales of cashew kernels to sister concerns in the course of exports (Rs. 3,21,15,027/-) The foregoing constitute the primary, undisputed facts of the case. 3.1 In the penalty proceedings, which were though considered only in respect of addition

ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP CIRCLE 8(1) LTU - II, CHENNAI

ITA 1402/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1402/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20\nM/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd.,\nNo.1, Sardar Patel Road,\nGuindy, Chennai-600 032.\n[PAN: AAAСА 4651 L]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nv.\nThe DCIT,\nNCC-8(1),\nLTU-II,\nChennai.\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1663/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20\nThe DCIT,\nNCC-8,\nChennai.\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nv.\nM/s. Ashok Leyl

Section 14ASection 92C

pricing scrutiny and the TPO in the order passed u/s 92CA(3) of\nthe Act had found these specified domestic transactions to be at arm's\nlength and no adverse inference was drawn u/s 80-IA(8) of the Act.\nHaving regard to these contemporaneous facts, we find merit in the plea\nof the Ld. AR of the assessee that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the

ITA 1663/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Ms.Ann Marry Baby, CIT
Section 14ASection 92C

pricing scrutiny and the TPO in the order passed u/s 92CA(3) of the Act had found these specified domestic transactions to be at arm's length and no adverse inference was drawn u/s 80-IA(8) of the Act. Having regard to these contemporaneous facts, we find merit in the plea of the Ld. AR of the assessee that