Navin Shantilal Mehta v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-32 (2) (4), Mumbai
90 Taxmann.com 16Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2018#3448 most cited
What is Navin Shantilal Mehta v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-32 (2) (4), Mumbai authority for?
Addition under section 69C for bogus purchases from non-existent suppliers is justified, even if purchase bills are produced and payments are made through banking channels, if other evidence is lacking.
35
judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.
Also referred to as
Navin Shantilal Mehta · section 69C · bogus purchases · hawala operators · non-existent suppliers · creditworthiness of creditor · peak credit theory · addition on account of bogus purchases
Sections most often in play
Issues it is cited on
Judgments citing Navin Shantilal Mehta v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-32 (2) (4), Mumbai
Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2