DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE, PUNE vs. SHREE CHANAKYA EDUCATION SOCIETY, AUNDH, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the statement of the accommodation entry provider indicated he only started providing such bills from January 2018, which was after the purchases in question. Furthermore, the assessee's substantial excess application of income negated the need for bogus transactions. Consequently, the addition and the penalty were deleted.
What were the facts?
The Revenue alleged that the assessee, a charitable trust, made bogus purchases of Rs. 1,84,99,795/- from a shell entity. The Assessing Officer made an addition under Section 68, treating these purchases as unexplained credit. The assessee contended that its application of income far exceeded its receipts, making bogus purchases unnecessary.
What were the issues?
Whether the purchases made by the assessee were genuine, and if not, whether the addition and subsequent penalty were justified based on the evidence.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 68,Section 271(1)(c),Section 147,Section 11,Section 12A,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 143(1),Section 132(4),Section 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(13)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- H.R. Mehta v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Mumbai125 citing72 Taxmann.com 110 · 2016 · HC
- PCIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji & Co Ltd.33 citing117 Taxmann.com 625 · 2020 · HC
- 249 ITR 533 (Bom) and CIT(E) v. Audyogik22 citing101 Taxmann.com 247 · 2019 · HC
- Sejal Jewellary v. Union of India20 citing171 Taxmann.com 846 · 2025 · HC
- PCIT v. Naveen Kumar Gupta16 citing168 Taxmann.com 574 · 2024 · HC
- 136/289 Taxman 238 (SC); Pr. CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Ltd.15 citing141 Taxmann.com 509 · 2022 · SC
- CIT v. Apeejay Education Society14 citing59 Taxmann.com 102 · 2015 · HC · Read judgment
- Ashok Kumar Rungta v. ITO10 citing167 Taxmann.com 429 · 2024 · HC
- Tirupati Construction Company v. Income-tax Officer\n10 citing165 Taxmann.com 176 · 2024 · HC
- Amar Jewellers Ltd. v. ACIT9 citing137 Taxmann.com 249 · 2022 · HC
- 6: (i) Kisnichand Chellaram vs. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (S.C.) (ii) Laxmnbhai S Patel v. CIT8 citing172 Taxmann 74 · 2008 · HC
- Obulapuram Mining Company (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT8 citing43 SOT 32 · 2011 · ITAT
- CIT v. Maharashtra Academy of Engineering and Educational Research4 citing161 Taxmann.com 290 · 2024 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS ASTHA CHANDRA
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 5. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy //
Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 04.08.2025 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 07.08.2025 Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before the 3 JM/AM Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 AM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to the Head 9 Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Shree Chanakya Education Society, Aundh…Pune11 Aug 2025Dismissed
Also relies on Ashok Kumar Rungta v. ITO and 4 other authorities
The Tribunal held that the statement of the accommodation entry provider indicated he only started providing such bills from January 2018, which was after the purchases in question. Furthermore, the assessee's substantia...
- DCIT Circle 1 Nashik, Nashik vs Shree Sai Properties, NashikPune27 Jan 2026Dismissed
Also relies on Tirupati Construction Company v. Income-tax Officer\n and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the AO erred in making additions based on seized material that did not directly implicate the assessee and in extrapolating figures without corroborative evidence. The additions were based on surmi...
- Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central… vs Sapna Karnani, Tonk PhatakJaipur14 Oct 2025Dismissed
Also relies on Tirupati Construction Company v. Income-tax Officer\n
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's cross-objection and dismissed the Revenue's appeals. Regarding the Assessee's cross-objection (Issue 4), the Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had exceeded its jurisdiction by directing th...
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Supreme Polymers Private Limited, JaipurJaipur6 Aug 2025Dismissed
Also relies on Tirupati Construction Company v. Income-tax Officer\n
The Tribunal held that additions under Section 153A can only be made if incriminating material is found during a search, especially for completed assessments. Since no such material was found, the additions were invalid.
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Varunarjun Trust, LucknowLucknow7 Aug 2025Dismissed
Also relies on CIT v. Apeejay Education Society
The Tribunal held that the donations were genuine, relying on previous ITAT judgments that found similar donations to be valid. The AO's disallowance was based on unsubstantiated assumptions and retracted statements.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026