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.

20 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 260clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai372Delhi219Karnataka109Jaipur75Kolkata54Bangalore48Calcutta34Chennai34Chandigarh29Surat21Ahmedabad20Pune17Hyderabad15Lucknow11Amritsar10Visakhapatnam8Indore8Nagpur7Raipur7Varanasi5Jodhpur3Rajkot3Cuttack2Telangana2Agra2SC2Jabalpur1Patna1Panaji1Bombay1Rajasthan1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 6813Addition to Income13Section 143(3)9Section 2509Section 143(2)6Section 2636Section 1485Section 69C5Section 133A4

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ARMEE INFOTECH,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No.1778/Ahd/2016 (by Revenue) is dismissed, and ITA No

ITA 1778/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1778/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Acit,Cir.6(1), Vs. Armee Infotech Ahmedabad. 1002, Akik Building Opp: Rajpath Club, Sg Highway, Ahmedabad 380 0054. Pan : Aaifa 4964 D

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Sharma
Section 143(2)

260 (Kar). He also made reference to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Molasses Co. P.Ltd. Vs. CIT, 37 ITR 66 (SC). 6. In response to the show cause notice of the AO, it was contended that the assessee has a total turnover of more than Rs.102 crores. It has shown GP margin

M/S. ARMEE INFOTECH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No.1778/Ahd/2016 (by Revenue) is dismissed, and ITA No

Bogus Purchases4
Survey u/s 133A4
Disallowance4
ITA 1900/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1778/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Acit,Cir.6(1), Vs. Armee Infotech Ahmedabad. 1002, Akik Building Opp: Rajpath Club, Sg Highway, Ahmedabad 380 0054. Pan : Aaifa 4964 D

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Sharma
Section 143(2)

260 (Kar). He also made reference to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Molasses Co. P.Ltd. Vs. CIT, 37 ITR 66 (SC). 6. In response to the show cause notice of the AO, it was contended that the assessee has a total turnover of more than Rs.102 crores. It has shown GP margin

MITESH ASHOKKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1622/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1622/Ahd/2019 & 580/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Jimi Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

260/-. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) though, confirmed the addition, however, restricted the same to 5% to the aforesaid bogus purchases. However, the assessee still aggrieved, has come in further appeal before us. ITA Nos.1622/Ahd/2019 & 580/Ahd/2024 Mitesh Ashokkumar Patel vs. ITO Asst.Years : 2011-12 & 2013-14 6. We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available

MITESH ASHOKKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 580/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1622/Ahd/2019 & 580/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Jimi Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

260/-. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) though, confirmed the addition, however, restricted the same to 5% to the aforesaid bogus purchases. However, the assessee still aggrieved, has come in further appeal before us. ITA Nos.1622/Ahd/2019 & 580/Ahd/2024 Mitesh Ashokkumar Patel vs. ITO Asst.Years : 2011-12 & 2013-14 6. We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available

AMBAR RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1569/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Varis Isani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 148Section 148ASection 249Section 69C

section 148 of the Act again declaring income at ₹5,38,260/-. The Assessing Officer issued notices but the Assessing Officer noted repeated non-compliance of notices and accordingly held that purchases of ₹4,82,10,278/- from M/s S.K. Enterprise were bogus

MUKESH SUMERMAL SANGHVI,A GR GORAGANDHI PALACE MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 794/AHD/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 May 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

bogus billing for purchases made F.Y. Amount 1 Suraj Steel India 2009-10 5,21,538/- 2 Suraj Steel India 2009-10 9,59,104/- 3 Goodluck Impex India 2009-10 5,66,280/- 4 Citizen Enterprises 2009-10 16,94,757/- 5 Vatika Metals Pvt. Ltd. 2009-10 29,37,006/- 6 Vatika Metals

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1278/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

purchase amount of Rs. 99,49,624/- under Section 69C of the Act, treating it as unexplained expenditure. 10.3 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO's finding that the suppliers were non-genuine but disagreed with the 100% disallowance. Relying on jurisdictional precedents, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition to 6% of the purchase value, concluding

H K ISPAT PVT. LTD.,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1392/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

purchase amount of Rs. 99,49,624/- under Section 69C of the Act, treating it as unexplained expenditure. 10.3 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO's finding that the suppliers were non-genuine but disagreed with the 100% disallowance. Relying on jurisdictional precedents, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition to 6% of the purchase value, concluding

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1277/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

purchase amount of Rs. 99,49,624/- under Section 69C of the Act, treating it as unexplained expenditure. 10.3 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO's finding that the suppliers were non-genuine but disagreed with the 100% disallowance. Relying on jurisdictional precedents, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition to 6% of the purchase value, concluding

THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE, MEHSANA vs. SHRI UMESH VADILAL KHAMAR, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1136/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Trivedi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 131(3)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 145(3) of the Act. Thus, there are two types of business components involved in this case, one is the taxing of the profit as per the Profit & Loss account based on the books of accounts regularly maintained and accepted to be correct by the A.O. and another business of unrecorded purchase and sale of the vegetables wherein

M/S. SHIV PUJAN DEVELOPERS,,KALOL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3,, MEHSANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 399/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2012-13 M/S.Shiv Pujan Develpers Ito, Ward-3 Mehsana. C/O. Jigneshkuamr Purushottambhai Vs. Patel, Abf-12, First Floor, Shivam Plaza Borisana Three Road Opp: Borisana Petrol Pump Kalol (N.G.)-382 721. Pan : Abtfs 2833 H

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alok Singh, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)

purchasers of the shops/residential flats, then it is difficult to construe that the diary was created with fictitious names. The stand of the AO is that head of survey team, Shri Mohan Kumar is a non-Gujarati and it was difficult for him to arrange a list of 84 persons in the early hours of the morning for incorporating

GENUINE FINANCE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 221/AHD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj K. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 44A

Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 by Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Ahmedabad without any addition on this count. The Ld. AR also submitted the copy of the assessment order for A.Y. 2011-12 and Audited Accounts for F.Y. 2011-12, Statement of Script wise purchase and sales for F.Y. 2011-12, stock summary

KRUTIKA ASHWIN SARVAIYA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 43/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

260 dated 20.01.2017 in the case of Misal Ashwinsinh Sarvaiya, son of Sarvaiya , and Shri Pravin M Makwana stated that said purchase invoice was neither given nor signed by his father, and the same is bogus invoices and not signed by his father. Thus the A.O. observed that it is established that J B & Sons did not carry

ACIT CC 2(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AISHA DHIRAJ GOGIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result: 50. To summarize the final outcome:

ITA 1673/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha["ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी नरे" साद िस!ा, लेखा सद" के सम#।]

260, to contend that third-party chats cannot determine the value of a different property. On merits, he emphasized the complete lack of corroboration, the time lag, the difference in property details, and the absence of any cash trail, relying on the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese

SHRI ARVINDKUMAR K, PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 749/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 749/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Shri Arvindkumar K. Patel, D.C.I.T, 11, Nobles Residency, Vs. Cirle-3(2) Nr. Vrundavan Part-3, Ahmedabad. Thaltek,, Ahmedabad-380 059. Pan: Aehpp4874N

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, with Smt. Arti N. Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, CIT.D.R
Section 131Section 36(1)(vii)

bogus transaction, the assessee cannot be denied the benefit of the deduction as provided under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act. vi. There was the recovery of the bad debts written off by the assessee in the year under consideration in the subsequent assessment year as evident from the profit and loss account for the year ended 31st March

SHAMA AJAY PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(IT & TP), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 132/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shama Ajay Patel, Vs. 2, Chandroday Society, The Cit(It & Tp), Opp. Golden Triangle, Sp Ahmedabad Stadium Road, Navjivan Post, Ahmedabad-380014 Pan : Alxpp 5273 E अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It & Tp), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. "Cit(It & Tp)" For Short] Dated 08.02.2023, In Exercise Of His Revisionary Powers Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Cit (It & Tp) Reads As Under:- “1. The Ld. Cit Has Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 Without Jurisdiction & Appropriate Powers Available Under The Act. It Is Submitted That The Order Passed U/S. 263 Is Bad In Law As A.O. Has Neither Committed Any Error Nor It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. It Be Held Now.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 147Section 263

purchased during the year. The assessee has sold out 30530 shares during the year and shown to have earned short term gain of Rs.51.16,561.25/-. The assessee in details submitted during the proceedings that she has earned short term gain of Rs.50,74,200/-. However, the opening value of shares could not be ascertained from her submission. Therefore, in absence

AANYA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2069/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Pipara, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 44Section 44ASection 68

purchased and where such items were accounted for in books had not been explained by Vitragbhai D. Dharu. This clearly proves that there was no sale/purchase transaction between them and cash was deposited and rotated to the books of the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-9, NOW CIRCLE-4(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3217/AHD/2015[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1992-93

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153Section 250

260 1993-94 Rs.22,440/- Rs. 19,58,540/- Being aggrieved by the addition made in the appellant's total income, the assessee has filed this appeal. As this is second round of proceedings (once went upto Hon'ble ITAT & setaside to AO). The issues related to direction of the Hon'ble ITAT. compliance by the AO & objections

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-9, NOW CIRCLE-4(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3218/AHD/2015[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1993-94

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153Section 250

260 1993-94 Rs.22,440/- Rs. 19,58,540/- Being aggrieved by the addition made in the appellant's total income, the assessee has filed this appeal. As this is second round of proceedings (once went upto Hon'ble ITAT & setaside to AO). The issues related to direction of the Hon'ble ITAT. compliance by the AO & objections

SAURABH PRAVINBHAI PATEL AND BRIJESH PRAVINBHAI PATEL AOP,ANAND vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1017/AHD/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 13ASection 143Section 80G

260/-. The assessee made the following donations and claimed deduction u/s. 80G and 80GGC of the Act. To verify the genuineness of the donations made by the political parties namely Kisan Party of India and Rashtriya Samajwadi Party (S) notices u/s. 133(6) were issued to confirm the receipt of donations along with the relevant details on the official email