Section 92 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 92 is Adobe Systems Inc. v. ADIT (203 Taxmann 554), cited in 59 of the 75 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 92

Adobe Systems Inc. v. ADIT
203 Taxmann 554 · 2011 · High Court
59
citing judgments

A fixed place of business constitutes a Permanent Establishment (PE) under Article 5(1) of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement only if the premises are actually at the disposal of the foreign enterprise, thereby satisfying the crucial 'disposal test', and it is through this fixed place that the foreign enterprise carries on its business, wholly or partly.

Delloite Consulting India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT/ITO
137 ITD 21 · 2012 · ITAT
42
citing judgments

The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) is empowered to determine the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of an international transaction at "nil" if the assessee fails to establish that payments made to an Associated Enterprise (AE) were commensurate with the benefit received or the quality of services availed. This determination constitutes an adjustment to ALP, distinct from a disallowance of expenditure.

Formula One World Championship Ltd. v. CIT (International Taxation)
80 Taxmann.com 347 · 2017 · Supreme Court
16
citing judgments
Asstt. CIT v. D. Navinchandra Exports (P.) Ltd.
87 Taxmann.com 306 · 2017 · Reported
14
citing judgments
NXP India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
116 Taxmann.com 421 · 2020 · ITAT
12
citing judgments
Hughes Systique India (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
36 Taxmann.com 41 · 2013 · High Court
11
citing judgments
Progress Rail Locomotive Inc. v. DCIT
466 ITR 76 · 2024 · High Court
8
citing judgments
Trib), Deloitte Consulting India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
52 Taxmann.com 19 · 2014 · ITAT
8
citing judgments
Knorr-Bremse India (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
236 Taxmann 318 · 2015 · High Court
8
citing judgments
Clear Plus India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
10 Taxmann.com 249 · 2011 · High Court
7
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 92

WARNER MEDIA INDIA P.LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-25(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1384/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accontant Member Assessment Year 2017-18 Warner Media India P. Ltd. Vs. Acit 5Th Floor, Radisson Commercial Circle 25(1) Plaza, National Highway No.8, New Delhi Mahipalpur, Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aaact3821H Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 244A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. PAYAL KHEMKA , K

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1000/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

TATA CHEMICALS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT 2 (3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7912/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2026AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nMr. Nitesh Joshi a/wFor Respondent: \nMr. Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 35Section 43BSection 80Section 91Section 92Section 92A(3)

HONDA TRADING CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DC/ACIT, CIRCLE 10(1), DELHI / ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5286/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 92C

RAMESH CHANDRA DETHALIYA,POLIAIKALAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SHAJAPUR, SHAJAPUR

ITA 629/IND/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

VODAFONE INDIA SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds of

ITA 5888/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhshri Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing) Vodafone India Services Private Dcit Circle-8(3)(1) Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan, Limited, 201-206, 2Nd Floor, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Shiv Smriti Chambers, Vs 49/A, Anne Besant Road, Above Corporation Bank, Worli, S.O. Mumbai-400018, Maharashtra Pan: Aaacz 1849 D Appellant (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Ajit Jain Advocate Department Represented By : Shri Pankaj Kumar Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement Of Order : 30.01.2026

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 254(1)Section 270Section 271

SPECTRIS TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3742/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shriyogesh Kumar Us & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3742/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Spectris Technologies P. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, 201-B, Second Floor, Vs. Ward-9(1), Park Centra, Sector-30, New Delhi. Gurgaon. Pan No.Aagcs6654R अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 92

CORPORATE WORLDWISE STAY LLP,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE -20(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing

ITA 5940/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92Section 92B

ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

ITA 1836/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Indruj Sngh Rai, Spl. Counsel
Section 234ASection 250(1)(a)Section 9(1)(vi)

ORACLE SYSTEMS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in :

ITA 1833/DEL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Indruj Sngh Rai, Spl. Counsel
Section 234ASection 250(1)(a)Section 9(1)(vi)

SPECTRIS TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose with above observations

ITA 3563/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Spectris Technologies Pvt. Vs. Acit Ltd., 201-B, Second Floor, New Delhi Park Centra, Sector -30 Gurgaon Pan No. Aagcs6654R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Revenue By Ms. Priya Goel, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.12.2025 Order Per C.N. Prasad, Jm, This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -20, New Delhi Vide Order Dated 27.03.2014 For The A.Y. 2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds :- 1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xx, New Delhi ("Cit(A)") Is Bad In Law.

Section 234BSection 92Section 92C

CINEPOLIS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD - 1(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 829/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Ms. Renu Jauhri[Assessment Year: 2016-17] Cinepolis India Pvt. Ltd., Additional / Joint/ Deputy / 10Th Floor, Dlf Two Horizon Assistant Deputy Centre, Dlf V, Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Gold Course Road, Income Tax Officer, Gurugram-122002, National E-Assessment Haryana, India. Centre, Delhi. Pan- Aadcc2076J Assessee Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92Section 92C

SHRI SURESHKUMAR HARJIVANBHAI CHANDARANA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2 (2) (1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 415/RJT/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot15 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 415/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) Sureshkumar Harjivanbhai Chandarana Acit, Circle – 2(2)(1), Rajkot A-75, New Market Yard, Village-Bedi, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Morbi, Highway, Rajkot- 360 003 Road, Rajkot –360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abcpc8536E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Durga Dutt, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27/11/2025 : 15/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) By Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal Cit(A), Ahmedabad-13 Dated 06.10.2023 [In Short, “Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(3) Of The Act, Vide Order Dated 19.12.2019. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee, Are As Follows:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Durga Dutt, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

COSMO FILMS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 6(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7849/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Roycosmo Films Limited, Vs. Dcit, Circle 6 (2), 1008, Dlf Tower A, New Delhi. Jasola District Centre, New Delhi – 110 025. (Pan : Aaacc1152C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2025 Date Of Order : 12.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessees Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.10.2013 Passed By The Dcit, Circle 6 (2), Delhi Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2013-14 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92

PICO DEEPALI OVERLAYS CONSORTIUM (BY DEEPALI DESIGNS EXHIBITS (P.) LTD.),DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 518/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Pico Deepali Overlays Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-17, Consortium, C/O Mna & Co., Delhi Cas, Suite 444, Tower-B, Spazedge, Sector 47, Sohna Road, Gurgaon – 122 018 Pan :Aabap1880F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144CSection 153ASection 92C

PICO DEEPALI OVERLAYS CONSORTIUM,HARYANA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 17, DELHI

In the result, both the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 412/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Pico Deepali Overlays Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-17, Consortium, C/O Mna & Co., Delhi Cas, Suite 444, Tower-B, Spazedge, Sector 47, Sohna Road, Gurgaon – 122 018 Pan :Aabap1880F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144CSection 153ASection 92C

LM WIND POWER AS ,DENMARK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 2(2)(1), DELHI

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4280/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Lm Wind Power As, Vs, Acit, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (Pan :Aabcl8590Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri Arpitgoyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 29.07.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (He Act") For Assessment Year 2020-21 Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.81,14, 14,893 Is Bad In Law, Void- Ab-Initio & Therefore, Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Set Aside.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 271ASection 44DSection 5Section 92C

LINTAS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 16(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5889/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2021-22 M/S. Lintas India Private Assessment Unit, Limited, Income Tax Department Or A Wing, 16Th Floor, Deputy Commissioner Of Parinee Crescenzo, Income Tax, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Circle 16(1), Bandra (East), 1) National Faceless Mumbai – 400 051 Assessment Centre (Nafac), Vs. Pan: Aaacl0124F Delhi 2)Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, New Marine Lines, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Ajit Jain, Ld. A.R. Shri Karnik Kansara, Ld. A.R Ms. Neha Rai, Ld. A.R. Ms. Sakshi Chimanani, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 22.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.05.2023, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Dispute Resolution Panel-1) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2021-22. 2 M/S. Lintas India Private Limited

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

SAP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER - DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(1), BANGALORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 1519/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K, Jm

Section 143Section 144BSection 144C

ACIT 5(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. DHARMANANDAN DIAMONDS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3615/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassistant Commissioner Of V/S. Dharmanandan Diamonds Income Tax – 5(1)(1) बनाम Pvt. Ltd., Fc 7081 7082, Room No. 568, 5Th Floor, Bharat Diamond Bourse, G- Aaykar Bhavan, Churchgate, Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400 020, Bandra (East), Mumbai – Maharashtra 400 051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccd6676J Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, (CIT-DR)
Section 271GSection 92Section 92D

Showing 1–20 of 75 · Page 1 of 4