BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

8 results for “bogus purchases”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,443Delhi763Kolkata493Chennai307Jaipur237Ahmedabad231Bangalore133Pune121Indore116Chandigarh108Karnataka104Hyderabad102Cochin57Lucknow51Surat43Cuttack43Calcutta42Rajkot38Raipur35Nagpur35Guwahati32Amritsar19Visakhapatnam18Ranchi18Patna15Jodhpur12Agra8Varanasi5Panaji3SC3Telangana2Dehradun2Jabalpur1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 6814Section 2639Section 118Addition to Income8Section 1487Bogus Purchases5Section 143(3)4Section 1474Unexplained Cash Credit4

HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 251/AGR/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

bogus, has not been quantified by the AO. k). It is a settled fact that even payment for purchase of Live Animals is exempt

Section 2503
Section 40A3
Exemption3

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 301/AGR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

bogus, has not been quantified by the AO. k). It is a settled fact that even payment for purchase of Live Animals is exempt

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 303/AGR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

bogus, has not been quantified by the AO. k). It is a settled fact that even payment for purchase of Live Animals is exempt

HARDAYAL CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, FIROZABAD vs. ITO (EXP) AGRA, AGRA

In the result, both the revenue appeals ITA No

ITA 246/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 250Section 56Section 68

exemption cannot be allowed as the said unsecured loans were held as bogus /fictitious and unexplained cash credits. It transpires from the perusal of the impugned order, that the first appellate authority has not specifically dealt with the issue of bogus purchases

ITO EXMP, AGRA vs. HARDAYAL CHARITABLE & EDUCATIONAL TRUST, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the revenue appeals ITA No

ITA 245/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 250Section 56Section 68

exemption cannot be allowed as the said unsecured loans were held as bogus /fictitious and unexplained cash credits. It transpires from the perusal of the impugned order, that the first appellate authority has not specifically dealt with the issue of bogus purchases

SURESH CHANDRA SADH,NEW DELHI vs. CIRCLE 4(1)(1),, ALIGARH

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

ITA 178/AGR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 68

exempt long term capital gain the assessee has introduced unaccounted money. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer noted that shares which were sold were originally purchased @Rs.1.25 per share on 19.02.2014 when the share price of M/s Yamini Investments Company Ltd. was Rs.35 in which M/s FIDELO Power and Infrastructure Limited (hereinafter referred as FPIL) got merged with the listed company

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 216/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2021AY 2011-12
Section 124Section 142Section 153

bogus liability was created by the assessee and refund of allotment money of Rs.2,37,29,097/- was made in cash on a single day through unsigned voucher. ITA No.216/Agr/2016, 183/Agr/2014,439/Agr/2015 & ITA No. 177/Agr/2014 18 (vi) That, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law & on facts by deleting the addition of Rs.57,68,605/-, on account of under section

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, MORENA vs. SHRI AGRASEN LOGISTICS, JOTAI ROAD, PORSA,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 108/AGR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

bogus in nature as the creditworthiness of the creditors was not proved. Thereafter, the assessment was completed at a total income of Rs. 17,02,25,505/- after making addition by holding the unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. Against such order the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order