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.

139 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 145(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai949Delhi506Jaipur224Ahmedabad139Surat137Kolkata118Chandigarh106Karnataka99Chennai88Bangalore65Raipur63Pune58Cochin57Amritsar35Calcutta35Nagpur33Agra29Rajkot29Jodhpur27Allahabad26Indore25Hyderabad24Cuttack21Lucknow20Guwahati14Patna7Visakhapatnam7Dehradun4Panaji3Ranchi2SC2Telangana2Varanasi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income82Section 143(3)59Disallowance57Section 6856Section 145(3)28Section 25022Section 14A22Section 14818Cash Deposit17Section 153A

SAKET M JAINI(HUF),AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-5, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 579/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 579/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Saket M. Jain (Huf), The Pr. Commissioner Of 403, 3Rd Eye Two, Vs. Income Tax-2, Nr. Joyalukkas Show Room, Ahmedabad. Opp. Parimal Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

section 145(3) and GP enhanced. (b) Why the sales amount of 4,02,00,055/- be not treated as unexplained cash credit in view of the finding of survey team that purchases are bogus

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

Showing 1–20 of 139 · Page 1 of 7

16
Penalty16
Section 133(6)15

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

ITA 276/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv., and Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR, and Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

bogus suppliers. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 and framed the ITA No.254 to 256 and 274 to 276 /Ahd/2024 3 reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

ITA 254/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv., and Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR, and Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

bogus suppliers. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 and framed the ITA No.254 to 256 and 274 to 276 /Ahd/2024 3 reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

ITA 256/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv., and Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR, and Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

bogus suppliers. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 and framed the ITA No.254 to 256 and 274 to 276 /Ahd/2024 3 reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

ITA 275/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: (Responent)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

bogus suppliers. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 and framed the reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions of section 145

RUDRA GLOBAL INFRA PRODUCTS LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR

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

ITA 2069/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 270ASection 69C

bogus purchases, only profit element embedded therein would be subjected to tax. In this case, the Gujarat High Court restricted the disallowance to 25% of the cost of such purchases in this year. 14. In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. S.V. Jiwani [2022] 145 taxmann.com 230 (Bombay) / [2023] 290 Taxman 178 (Bombay

CHIRAG ISHWARBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1192/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1182 & 1192/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Chirag Ishwarbhai Patel, I.T.O., 49 Dharamanth Prabhu Society, Vs. Ward-3(3)(6), Near Adishawar Society, Ahmedabad. Nikol Road, Naroda, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

purchases from him, reopening notice against assesses was justified" 2.4. Further, the appellant has also not brought any specific evidences suggesting that this issue was considered in original Assessment Proceedings. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Praful Chunilal Patel v/s ACIT, 236 ITR 832 (Guj) has held as under: j "Section 147 of the Income

CHIRAG ISHWARBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(6), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1182/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1182 & 1192/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Chirag Ishwarbhai Patel, I.T.O., 49 Dharamanth Prabhu Society, Vs. Ward-3(3)(6), Near Adishawar Society, Ahmedabad. Nikol Road, Naroda, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

purchases from him, reopening notice against assesses was justified" 2.4. Further, the appellant has also not brought any specific evidences suggesting that this issue was considered in original Assessment Proceedings. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Praful Chunilal Patel v/s ACIT, 236 ITR 832 (Guj) has held as under: j "Section 147 of the Income

DCIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ALPESHKUMAR C.PATEL, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1991/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh CIT. D.R with Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 41(1)Section 54F

section 145(3) of the Act. Thereafter, the AO estimated the profit from work contract at Rs. 95,58,606/- being net profit margin of 12% on total receipt and made addition of Rs. 89,05,774/- after adjusting income of Rs. 6,52,832/- declared by the assessee from impugned labour contract. 19. On appeal by the assessee

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 187/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR with Shri Urjit Shah, A.R
Section 40ASection 68

3 cars namely Audi-A6, Sonata, Innova on the reasoning A.Y. 2009-2010 with others 11 that the assessee has failed to furnish the ownership of the cars in dispute which is one of the prerequisite to claim depreciation. Admittedly, the assessee has furnished the purchase invoices and RC book which are placed on pages 145

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1320/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR with Shri Urjit Shah, A.R
Section 40ASection 68

3 cars namely Audi-A6, Sonata, Innova on the reasoning A.Y. 2009-2010 with others 11 that the assessee has failed to furnish the ownership of the cars in dispute which is one of the prerequisite to claim depreciation. Admittedly, the assessee has furnished the purchase invoices and RC book which are placed on pages 145

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1447/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR with Shri Urjit Shah, A.R
Section 40ASection 68

3 cars namely Audi-A6, Sonata, Innova on the reasoning A.Y. 2009-2010 with others 11 that the assessee has failed to furnish the ownership of the cars in dispute which is one of the prerequisite to claim depreciation. Admittedly, the assessee has furnished the purchase invoices and RC book which are placed on pages 145

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2557/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR with Shri Urjit Shah, A.R
Section 40ASection 68

3 cars namely Audi-A6, Sonata, Innova on the reasoning A.Y. 2009-2010 with others 11 that the assessee has failed to furnish the ownership of the cars in dispute which is one of the prerequisite to claim depreciation. Admittedly, the assessee has furnished the purchase invoices and RC book which are placed on pages 145

KSHETRAPAL GOLD PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 105/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kshetrapal Gold Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sf-1, Kush Avenue, Mandvi Ni Ward 2(1)(2), Pole, Manek Chowk, Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380001 Pan : Aafck 6724 M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" यथ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" यथ" Assessee By : Shri Mahesh Chhajed, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.10.2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 20.11.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit (A) Is Against Law, Equity & Justice. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding Rejection Of Books Of Accounts In Contravention To The Provisions Of Act. 3. The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding Addition Made By The Ld. A.O. U/S 68 Of The Act Even After Rejection Books Of Accounts.

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr DR
Section 115BSection 145Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

bogus purchases were recorded and opening and closing stock was not verifiable. As pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, in terms of provisions of Section 145(3

THE ACIT,(OSD)-I,RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2353/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

bogus purchases), the assessee’s books did not meet the statutory standards for completeness and accuracy. The AO invoked section 145(3

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1747/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

bogus purchases), the assessee’s books did not meet the statutory standards for completeness and accuracy. The AO invoked section 145(3

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1749/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

bogus purchases), the assessee’s books did not meet the statutory standards for completeness and accuracy. The AO invoked section 145(3

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)-I,RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2036/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

bogus purchases), the assessee’s books did not meet the statutory standards for completeness and accuracy. The AO invoked section 145(3

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 797/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

bogus purchases), the assessee’s books did not meet the statutory standards for completeness and accuracy. The AO invoked section 145(3

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1528/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

bogus purchases), the assessee’s books did not meet the statutory standards for completeness and accuracy. The AO invoked section 145(3