What is the leading case on Section 92E of the Income Tax Act?

PCIT v. Music Broadcast (P.) Ltd. (155 Taxmann.com 277) is the decision most relied on for Section 92E, cited in 8 judgments.

Which cases are most cited on Section 92E?

PCIT v. Music Broadcast (P.) Ltd. (155 Taxmann.com 277) — 8 citing judgments; Cadilla Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (81 Taxmann.com 379) — 7 citing judgments; Apar Industries Ltd. v. DCIT (117 Taxmann.com 970) — 5 citing judgments; Zee Enterprises Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (102 Taxmann.com 78) — 3 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 92E?

BharatTax indexes 132 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 92E of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 92E of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.172

Section 92E of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 172 (Report from an accountant to be furnished by persons entering into international transaction or specified domestic transaction) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 172 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 92E is PCIT v. Music Broadcast (P.) Ltd. (155 Taxmann.com 277), cited in 8 of the 132 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 92E

PCIT v. Music Broadcast (P.) Ltd.

155 Taxmann.com 277 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

Cadilla Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT

81 Taxmann.com 379 · 2017 · ITAT

citing judgments

Apar Industries Ltd. v. DCIT

117 Taxmann.com 970 · 2020 · Reported

citing judgments

Zee Enterprises Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

102 Taxmann.com 78 · 2019 · Reported

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 92E

Scott Edil Advance Research Laboratories and Education Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT/ACIT(Cen)-1 Chd, Chandigarh

ITA 1542/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Rajesh Damodarlal Sharma, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1540/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1541/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1542/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Scott Edil Advance Research Dcit/Acit (Cen) – 1 Laboratories & Education Ltd. C R Building, Chandigarh – 160017 बनाम/ Vs. Plot No. 28/6, Industrial Area Phase – Ii, Chandigarh – 160002 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aancs-1120-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca), Ms. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) & Sh. Hrithik Singla (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-09-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 22-09-2026 :

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR

Section 153ASection 271BSection 40A(2)(b)Section 92BSection 92E

Scott Edil Advance Research Laboratories and Education Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT/ACIT(Cen)-1 Chd, Chandigarh

ITA 1541/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2026AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR

Section 153ASection 271BSection 40A(2)(b)Section 92BSection 92E

Scott Edil Advance Research Laboratories and Education Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT/ACIT(Cen)-1 Chd, Chandigarh

ITA 1540/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2026AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR

Section 153ASection 271BSection 40A(2)(b)Section 92BSection 92E

Global Analytics India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITTPA 30/CHNY/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jul 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 30/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Global Analytics India Private The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Ascendas It Park, Vs. Income-Tax, Circle 1(1) Unit 5, 1St Floor, Pinnacle Building Chennai. International Tech Park, Csir Road, Taramani Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaccc2969F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Jayaganesh, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2026 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 21.07.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am :

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Jayaganesh, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92E

ACIT CC 2(4) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Giraffe Developers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1969/MUM/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pawan Singh () Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhatt, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath – CIT DR a/w Shri Rajgopal Parthasarathi –

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 271BSection 92E

Baid Milan International Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal assessee is allowed

ITA 105/KOL/2026[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Apr 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Baid Mila International Pvt. Dcit, Circle 4(1) Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 68, Canning Street, Gpo, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal. 700069, West Bengal. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcb3071G Assessee By : Shri Anil Kochar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Arun Kumar Meena, Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Meena, DR

Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 92E

Shree Nath Kripa Foods Private Limited, Riico Industrial Area, Nokha vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO, Ward, Nokha

In the result, the appeal is allowed for the statistical purpose

ITA 198/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Bleshree Nath Kripa Foods Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ito, Ward F-41 & F-42, Riico Industrial Bikaner Area, Nokha, Bikaner - 334803 Pan No. Aamcs 9124 Q Assessee By Shri Amit Kothari, Ca (Physical) Revenue By Shri Lalit Kumar Bishnoi, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As Nfac/ Cit(A)] Dated 30.01.2024 With Respect To Assessment Year 2016-17 Challenging Therein The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Ex-Parte In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice.

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144cSection 92CSection 92E

ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Farmson Pharmaceutical Gujarat Private Limited, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1835/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-D.R

Section 115JSection 144(1)Section 37Section 92BSection 92CSection 92E

Kippy Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, CC - 3(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2727/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: S/Shri Ratan Kumar Goel &For Respondent: Shri Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

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

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

Voestalpine Vae Vkn India Pvt. Ltd. (Formely Known As Vae Vkn Industries Pvt. Ltd.), New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 17(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3835/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2009-10] M/S. Voestalpine Vae Vkn India Vs Acit, Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Circle-17(1), M/S. Vae Vkn Industries New Delhi Pvt.Ltd.), 24/5, Sri Ram Road, Civil Lines, Delhi-110054. Pan-Aaacv3943J Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. & Ms. Ragini Handa, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10.10.2025 Order

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 92E

M/S. Tbea Shenyang Trasformer Group Company Limited, Vadodara vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Int. Tax., Vadodara

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 121/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2013-2014 M/S.Tbea Shenyang Transformer Dcit, International Group Company Limited Vs. Taxation Tbea Green Energy Park Vadodara. National Highway No.8 Village : Miyagam Karjan Vadodara Pan : Aadct 4557 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Ms.Amrin Pathan, Ar : Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Arises From The Assessment Order Dated 07.11.2017 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation, Vadodara [Hereinafter Referred To As “Assessing Officer Or Ao”], Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For Assessment Year 2013-14 In Accordance With The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel – 2, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As “Drp”]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92E

Sutherland Global Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITTPA 21/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं/.It(Tp)A No.: 21/Chny/2023 धनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sutherland Global Services Private The Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd, Vs. Income Tax, Gateway Office Parks, Central Circle 3(3), 2Nd Floor, Building B2, Chennai. No.16, G.S.T Road, Perungalathur, Chennai, – 600 063. [Pan: Aaecs-8093-A] प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी/Appellant) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Vijay Mehta, C.A., Mr. Harsh Bafna, C.A & Ms. Asmita Desouza, C.A. प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No. Itba/Ast/S/143(3)/2022-23/1048599548(1) Dated 10.01.2023 Of The Assessing Officer For The Assessment Years 2017-18 Passed In Compliance To Directions Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Bengaluru Vide Order Dated 29.12.2022. 2. The Assessee Had Broadly Raised Grounds Of Appeal For 5 Transfer Pricing Issues & 1 Corporate Tax Issue. The Ld.Ar For The Assessee Submitted That, Subsequently, The Assessee Had Preferred Map Proceedings For Redressal Of Its Issues. Accordingly, In Consonance With The Relief Obtained Through Map Proceedings The Assessee Has Modified Its Grounds Of Appeal Through Its Letters Dated 08.04.2025 R.W.17.04.2025. Further, The Assessee Had Also Filed

For Appellant: Shri. Vijay Mehta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT

Dhiren Ramanlal Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 19(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2534/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 2534/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2022-23) Dhiren Ramanlal Shah V/S. Income Tax Officer-19(1)(1) Fc-5011, Bharat Diamond बिाम 606, Piramal Chambers, Bourse, Bandra Kurla Dr. S. S. Rao Marg, Parel, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400012 Mumbai- 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aayps3843B Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Atul Mehta/ Mr. Uday ShahFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(3)Section 234FSection 250Section 92E

DCIT., Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Jodas Expoim Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 702/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.702/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dy. C.I.T Vs. M/S. Jodas Expoim (P) Ltd Central Circle 3(2) Siddipet, Telangana Hyderabad Pan:Aabcj8653L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 7/5/2024 Arising From The Penalty Order Passed U/S 271Aa Of The I.T. Act, 1961 For The A.Y 2016-17. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S 271Aa Of The Act Even Though The Assessee Failed To File Form 3Ceb As Mandated U/S 92E Of The Act Within The Time Prescribed U/S 139(1) Of The Act? 2) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S 271Aa Of The Act Even Though The Assessee Failed To Report

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR

Section 115JSection 133ASection 139(1)Section 233ASection 271ASection 92ASection 92CSection 92DSection 92E