← All Phrases

“bogus purchases”

DisallowancesSection 69CSection 69C9,532 judgments

The decision most relied on for bogus purchases is CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (355 ITR 290), cited in 712 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on bogus purchases

CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.
355 ITR 290 · 2013 · High Court
712
citing judgments

If an assessee makes purchases from bogus parties, but the underlying goods are genuinely acquired and sold, only the profit margin embedded in such purchases, and not the entire value of the bogus purchases, should be added to the assessee's income.

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT
316 ITR 274 · 2009 · High Court
460
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or unverifiable purchases, rather than disallowing the entire purchase value, a reasonable profit element or a proportionate percentage of the purchases should be added back to the assessee's income.

Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT
58 ITD 428 · 1996 · ITAT
430
citing judgments

Where purchases are found to be non-genuine or fictitious, a reasonable disallowance of 25% of such purchases or the peak credit, whichever is higher, can be made. This is applied to address unexplained expenditure under Section 69C when actual goods are likely procured from the grey market.

CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd.
418 ITR 315 · 2019 · Supreme Court
408
citing judgments

Income tax additions cannot be sustained merely on the basis of uncorroborated statements or allegations. The Revenue must bring on record sufficient material and allow the assessee to produce evidence to prove such additions.

Nikunj Eximp Enterprises v. CIT
216 Taxmann 171 · 2013 · High Court
325
citing judgments

Purchases may be treated as genuine even if the purchase parties are untraceable or not available for verification, as long as there is no specific evidence from the parties themselves denying the transactions or proving them to be bogus.

CIT v. Shyam R. Pawar
54 Taxmann.com 108 · 2015 · High Court
279
citing judgments

Transactions involving the purchase and sale of shares cannot be considered bogus where the assessee provides documentary evidence, unless the revenue brings substantial evidence on record to reject such proof. This principle is consistently applied in cases concerning claims of bogus long-term capital gains arising from penny stock transactions.

CIT v. Simit P. Seth
38 Taxmann.com 385 · 2013 · High Court
278
citing judgments

When an assessee obtains accommodation bills for purchases but the corresponding sales are genuine, the addition to income is limited to the gross profit margin embedded in such purchases. This principle acknowledges that the underlying sales were real, but profit was suppressed through bogus invoices.

CIT v. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd.
355 ITR 498 · 2013 · High Court
252
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or hawala purchases where the existence of transactions is not entirely denied, only the profit element embedded in such purchases, and not the entire purchase price, can be added to the assessee's income. The focus is on determining a reasonable profit percentage for such additions.

Judgments citing bogus purchases

Jatinder Gupta, Jalandhar vs. DCIT, Jalandhar

ITA 554/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 554/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Jatinder Gupta Dcit (Prop. Mahajan Molasses Co.) बनाम/ Circle-4 Gt Road, Dyalpur, Jalandhar Jalandhar-144001 Vs. Punjab-144001 "ायीलेखासं./Pan. Aempg-6663-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 484/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Acit Shri Jatinder Gupta Circle-4, Jalandhar-144001 बनाम/ (Prop. Mahajan Molasses Co.) Punjab Gt Road, Dyalpur, Jalandhar Vs. Punjab-144001 "ायी लेखा सं./Pan. Aempg-6663-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Ashray Sarna (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Jivandeep Singh Kahlon (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)]

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Jivandeep Singh Kahlon (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

sole issue that arises for our consideration is addition of Rs.316.58 Lacs as made by Ld. AO on account of alleged bogus purchases. The registry has noted delay of 42 days in assessee’s appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of condonation ... reopened pursuant to receipt of information from ITO- 4(3), Abohar assessing another entity i.e., M/s Modern Sales Corporation that the assessee made bogus purchase of Naku / Rice Bran from that entity for Rs.316.58 Lacs. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 was issued on 27-07-2022 which was followed by notices

ACIT, Circle-4, Jalandhar, C.R. Building, Civil Lines vs. Sh. Jatinder Gupta, Jalandhar

ITA 484/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 554/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Jatinder Gupta Dcit (Prop. Mahajan Molasses Co.) बनाम/ Circle-4 Gt Road, Dyalpur, Jalandhar Jalandhar-144001 Vs. Punjab-144001 "ायीलेखासं./Pan. Aempg-6663-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 484/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Acit Shri Jatinder Gupta Circle-4, Jalandhar-144001 बनाम/ (Prop. Mahajan Molasses Co.) Punjab Gt Road, Dyalpur, Jalandhar Vs. Punjab-144001 "ायी लेखा सं./Pan. Aempg-6663-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Ashray Sarna (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Jivandeep Singh Kahlon (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)]

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Jivandeep Singh Kahlon (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

sole issue that arises for our consideration is addition of Rs.316.58 Lacs as made by Ld. AO on account of alleged bogus purchases. The registry has noted delay of 42 days in assessee’s appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of condonation ... reopened pursuant to receipt of information from ITO- 4(3), Abohar assessing another entity i.e., M/s Modern Sales Corporation that the assessee made bogus purchase of Naku / Rice Bran from that entity for Rs.316.58 Lacs. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 was issued on 27-07-2022 which was followed by notices

Pooja Kansal, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, G.Garh, Gobindgarh

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 225/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 224 & 225/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Pooja Kansal, The Ito, बनाम Kansla Singla & Ward -1, Associates, Gobindgarh Vs. Sco 80-81, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Abypk5904G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. T.N. Singla, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Kashyap, Cit Dr (Virtual Mode) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Both The Appeals Pertaining To A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017- 18 Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate

For Appellant: Sh. T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Kashyap, CIT DR
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 65A

reproduced as under: - Short Note: The transactions of alleged bogus transactions were made in the accounts of the company and the expenses of said bogus purchases are also booked in the accounts of the companies. Thus, the benefit of any alleged bogus purchases was availed by the company, which ... enquiry by the assessing officer and the said addition in the hands of appellant is made on the borrowed satisfaction. Further, the alleged bogus purchases are recorded in the regular books maintained by 8 224 & 225-Chd-2025 – Pooja Kansal, Chandigarh the company and the expenditure of the same

Pooja Kansal, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, G.Garh, Gobindgarh

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 224/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 224 & 225/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Pooja Kansal, The Ito, बनाम Kansla Singla & Ward -1, Associates, Gobindgarh Vs. Sco 80-81, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Abypk5904G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. T.N. Singla, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Kashyap, Cit Dr (Virtual Mode) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Both The Appeals Pertaining To A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017- 18 Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate

For Appellant: Sh. T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Kashyap, CIT DR
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 65A

reproduced as under: - Short Note: The transactions of alleged bogus transactions were made in the accounts of the company and the expenses of said bogus purchases are also booked in the accounts of the companies. Thus, the benefit of any alleged bogus purchases was availed by the company, which ... enquiry by the assessing officer and the said addition in the hands of appellant is made on the borrowed satisfaction. Further, the alleged bogus purchases are recorded in the regular books maintained by 8 224 & 225-Chd-2025 – Pooja Kansal, Chandigarh the company and the expenditure of the same