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.

26 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 197clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai296Delhi193Karnataka99Jaipur79Surat78Bangalore45Chandigarh33Kolkata32Chennai27Ahmedabad26Pune20Raipur18Rajkot13Hyderabad10Indore7Varanasi5Amritsar5Nagpur4Ranchi3Cochin2Guwahati2Allahabad2Lucknow2Jodhpur1Agra1Gauhati1Dehradun1Cuttack1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1SC1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)27Section 14723Section 145(3)19Section 14818Addition to Income18Disallowance16Section 143(2)15Reassessment11Section 250

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 255/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
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(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

197) (Bombay) where Assessing Officer treated purchases made by assessee as bogus and made addition in respect of same, since assessee had maintained inventory of stock and payments for such purchases were made by account payee cheques and tax invoices were obtained, such purchases could not be rejected and addition to be restricted to the extent of profit element.\n6.6

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

9
Section 688
Section 139(1)6
Reopening of Assessment5

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

197) (Bombay) where Assessing Officer treated purchases made by assessee as bogus and made addition in respect of same, since assessee had maintained inventory of stock and payments for such purchases were made by account payee cheques and tax invoices were obtained, such purchases could not be rejected and addition to be restricted to the extent of profit element

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

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

197) (Bombay) where Assessing Officer treated purchases made by assessee as bogus and made addition in respect of same, since assessee had maintained inventory of stock and payments for such purchases were made by account payee cheques and tax invoices were obtained, such purchases could not be rejected and addition to be restricted to the extent of profit element

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

197) (Bombay) where Assessing Officer treated purchases made by assessee as bogus and made addition in respect of same, since assessee had maintained inventory of stock and payments for such purchases were made by account payee cheques and tax invoices were obtained, such purchases could not be rejected and addition to be restricted to the extent of profit element

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

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

ITA 274/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

197) (Bombay) where Assessing Officer\ntreated purchases made by assessee as bogus and made addition in respect of same,\nsince assessee had maintained inventory of stock and payments for such purchases\nwere made by account payee cheques and tax invoices were obtained, such\npurchases could not be rejected and addition to be restricted to the extent of profit\nelement.\n6.6

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

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

ITA 275/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

197) (Bombay) where Assessing Officer\ntreated purchases made by assessee as bogus and made addition in respect of same,\nsince assessee had maintained inventory of stock and payments for such purchases\nwere made by account payee cheques and tax invoices were obtained, such\npurchases could not be rejected and addition to be restricted to the extent of profit\nelement.\n6.6

DINESHCHANDRA LADDHA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO WARD 1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the asessee is allowed

ITA 1920/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vinit Moondra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250Section 690Section 69C

Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: “1. In his order dated 21/03/2024, the Ld. AO has erred in law by making an addition of Rs. 76,34,197 u/s 690 rws 115BBE

KALYAN JEWELS PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Waseem Ahmed & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Kalyan Jewells P.Ltd. Ito, Ward-2(1)(2) 49, Super Mall Vs Ahmedabad. Nr.Lal Bungalow, Ahmedabad 380 015 Pan : Aacck 4717 B

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Urjit Shah, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 179(1)Section 234

bogus purchase. The assessee company has also obtained accommodation entries of Rs.1,37,815/- during the year under consideration in the form of purchase from the one of the benami concern of Rajendra Jain. Further, information received from the Addl. DIT (Investigation)-Unit-l, Ahmedabad in respect of accommodation entries paid by the companies and controlled by shri pratik shah

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJESHKUMAR RAMESHCHANDRA SHAH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1074/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &
Section 250Section 68

bogus sales and there is either no corresponding stock with the appellant or there were no such purchases against these sales. 5.3.13 The Supreme Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) has held that where the cash deposited was out of the books of account & cash book and where such books

BHAUMIK JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1642/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1642/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bhaumik Jewellers Private The Ito बनाम/ Limited Ward-1(1)(2) V/S. 111, Gold Souk Complex Ahmedabad B/H. Sapphire Complex Cg Road Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aagcb 2423 B (अपीलाथ)/ Appellant) (*+ यथ)/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short “The Cit(A)”] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Dated 26/07/2024 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (In Short “The Ao”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Act For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated The Confirmation Of The Addition Of Rs. 9,65,97,834/- Made By The Ao Under Section 68 Of The Act Bhaumik Jewellers Private Limited Vs. The Ito Asst. Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

section 115BBE of the Act, treating the same as income from undisclosed sources. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A), however, confirmed the action of the AO. The CIT(A) relied heavily upon the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vaishnavi

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

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) vs. M/S. MARDIA CHEMICALS LTD.,,

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 3209/AHD/2003[98-99]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)

197 to 213-A of the paper- book filed alongwith its written submission dated 24th December, 2001, wherein the details of interest expenses, corroborative evidences of payment proofs etc. are also given. The appellant also brought to my notice the appeal orders of my predecessors for A. Y. 1994-95 to A. Y. 1996-97, wherein, in case

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CAIRCLE-2(2) vs. M/S. MARDIA CHEMICALS LTD.,,

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 855/AHD/2004[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)

197 to 213-A of the paper- book filed alongwith its written submission dated 24th December, 2001, wherein the details of interest expenses, corroborative evidences of payment proofs etc. are also given. The appellant also brought to my notice the appeal orders of my predecessors for A. Y. 1994-95 to A. Y. 1996-97, wherein, in case

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) vs. M/S. MARDIA CHEMICALS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 3208/AHD/2003[97-98]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)

197 to 213-A of the paper- book filed alongwith its written submission dated 24th December, 2001, wherein the details of interest expenses, corroborative evidences of payment proofs etc. are also given. The appellant also brought to my notice the appeal orders of my predecessors for A. Y. 1994-95 to A. Y. 1996-97, wherein, in case

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) vs. M/S. MARDIA CHEMICALS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 3210/AHD/2003[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)

197 to 213-A of the paper- book filed alongwith its written submission dated 24th December, 2001, wherein the details of interest expenses, corroborative evidences of payment proofs etc. are also given. The appellant also brought to my notice the appeal orders of my predecessors for A. Y. 1994-95 to A. Y. 1996-97, wherein, in case

THE ACIT, CEN- CIR 2(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S MARDIA CHEMICALS LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 3437/AHD/2002[93-94]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)

197 to 213-A of the paper- book filed alongwith its written submission dated 24th December, 2001, wherein the details of interest expenses, corroborative evidences of payment proofs etc. are also given. The appellant also brought to my notice the appeal orders of my predecessors for A. Y. 1994-95 to A. Y. 1996-97, wherein, in case

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI UMANG H. THAKKAR, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 2548/AHD/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 2150/Ahd/2008 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 बनाम Shri Umang Hiralal Thakkar, The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Dharmadev House, Income-Tax, Shyamal Cross Road, Satellite, Central Circle 1(1), Ahmedabad – 380015 Ahmedabad Pan : Aavpt 8621 R आयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 2548/Ahd/2008 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 बनाम Shri Umang Hiralal Thakkar, The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. 305, Sahajanand Plaza, Bhatta Income-Tax, Ch Ar Rasta, Paldi, Ahmedabad Central Circle 1(1), Pan : Aavpt 8621 R Ahmedabad अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" यथ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" यथ" िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar & Shri Parin Shah, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav, Cit-Dr तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2024 सुनवाई क" क" तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30.07.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR &For Respondent: Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

bogus, and accordingly he treated the source of investment in jewellery to be unexplained and added the same to the income of the assessee. While doing so, he noted in his order that the withdrawals made from his capital account were surely not used for investment in jewellery, but were used for his personal purposes. The personal expenditures and other

SHRI UMANG HIRALAL THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 2150/AHD/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 2150/Ahd/2008 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 बनाम Shri Umang Hiralal Thakkar, The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Dharmadev House, Income-Tax, Shyamal Cross Road, Satellite, Central Circle 1(1), Ahmedabad – 380015 Ahmedabad Pan : Aavpt 8621 R आयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 2548/Ahd/2008 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 बनाम Shri Umang Hiralal Thakkar, The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. 305, Sahajanand Plaza, Bhatta Income-Tax, Ch Ar Rasta, Paldi, Ahmedabad Central Circle 1(1), Pan : Aavpt 8621 R Ahmedabad अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" यथ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" यथ" िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar & Shri Parin Shah, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav, Cit-Dr तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2024 सुनवाई क" क" तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30.07.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR &For Respondent: Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

bogus, and accordingly he treated the source of investment in jewellery to be unexplained and added the same to the income of the assessee. While doing so, he noted in his order that the withdrawals made from his capital account were surely not used for investment in jewellery, but were used for his personal purposes. The personal expenditures and other

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

ITA 477/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: \nMs. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: \nShri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 68Section 80G

purchase, there is no contemporaneous\nsettlement agreement, confirmation from the counter-party, or other\nprimary document on record evidencing the nature and basis of the\nsettlement. This absence of supporting documentation is unusual,\nparticularly given the significance of the amount and the nature of the\nclaim.\n65.\nIt is also noted that out of the total sum of Rs.15