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.

210 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 43(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,343Delhi1,146Jaipur293Kolkata237Chennai212Ahmedabad210Bangalore189Surat142Chandigarh127Karnataka110Hyderabad109Pune99Indore83Cochin60Raipur59Amritsar56Guwahati48Nagpur48Rajkot43Visakhapatnam41Calcutta37Cuttack35Lucknow31Allahabad29Jodhpur24Agra22Telangana7Varanasi7Patna6SC4Jabalpur3Panaji3Ranchi2Dehradun2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income75Disallowance55Section 143(3)51Section 14748Section 14831Section 6830Section 26323Section 25022Section 143(2)18

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

Section of AO’s Order 147 r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B 144B 144B Amount of Alleged Bogus 92,95,26,352/- 49,84,90,503/- 412,48,43,029/- Purchases added (Rs.) Gross Profit Rate Applied by AO 12.50% 12.50% 12.50% Addition Made

Showing 1–20 of 210 · Page 1 of 11

...
Section 234B17
Penalty17
Bogus Purchases16

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

Section of AO’s Order 147 r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B 144B 144B Amount of Alleged Bogus 92,95,26,352/- 49,84,90,503/- 412,48,43,029/- Purchases added (Rs.) Gross Profit Rate Applied by AO 12.50% 12.50% 12.50% Addition Made

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

Section of AO’s Order 147 r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B 144B 144B Amount of Alleged Bogus 92,95,26,352/- 49,84,90,503/- 412,48,43,029/- Purchases added (Rs.) Gross Profit Rate Applied by AO 12.50% 12.50% 12.50% Addition Made

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

Section of AO's Order 147 r.w.s. 144B 143(3) r.w.s. 144B 143(3) r.w.s. 144B Amount of Alleged Bogus Purchases added (Rs.) 92,95,26,352/- 49,84,90,503/- 412,48,43,029/- Gross Profit Rate Applied by AO 12.50% 12.50% 12.50% Addition Made

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. N K PROTEINS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, no question of law arises

ITA 546/AHD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

43(5) read with section 73 of the Act being Speculative Loss. Therefore Speculative loss created out of these transactions cannot be set off against the normal business income. SUMMARY 7.4 The above arguments are summarized as under: a. The assessee group is closely linked with NSEL. b. Though NKPL claimed to a broker for NSEL in effect all transactions

N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, no question of law arises

ITA 464/AHD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

43(5) read with section 73 of the Act being Speculative Loss. Therefore Speculative loss created out of these transactions cannot be set off against the normal business income. SUMMARY 7.4 The above arguments are summarized as under: a. The assessee group is closely linked with NSEL. b. Though NKPL claimed to a broker for NSEL in effect all transactions

THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 2301/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri A.C. Shah & Shri Bhadresh
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)

43 taxmann.com 244 (Gujarat) I. Section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained investments (Bogus purchases) -Assessment year 2007-08 - Assessee was in business of manufacturing and exports of de-oiled cake, starch, glucose and cotton yarn - Assessing Officer examined various purchases made by assessee and noted that entire purchases made from one 'V were bogus and added entire

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 1826/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri A.C. Shah & Shri Bhadresh
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)

43 taxmann.com 244 (Gujarat) I. Section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained investments (Bogus purchases) -Assessment year 2007-08 - Assessee was in business of manufacturing and exports of de-oiled cake, starch, glucose and cotton yarn - Assessing Officer examined various purchases made by assessee and noted that entire purchases made from one 'V were bogus and added entire

THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 1477/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri A.C. Shah & Shri Bhadresh
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250(6)

43 taxmann.com 244 (Gujarat) I. Section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained investments (Bogus purchases) -Assessment year 2007-08 - Assessee was in business of manufacturing and exports of de-oiled cake, starch, glucose and cotton yarn - Assessing Officer examined various purchases made by assessee and noted that entire purchases made from one 'V were bogus and added entire

THE JT. CIT, RANGE-9,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNIQUE METROPOILS,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 3140/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Mar 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C.S. Sharma, Sr. D.R
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

bogus purchases calculated at 12.5% of the purchases which is excessive when no such disallowance is called. The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee reiterated that assessee had provided all details and evidences and vide reply dated 24-02- 2014, copy of PAN card of parties, confirmation of ledger account duly signed by parties, copies of invoices and delivery challan

M/S. UNIQUE METROPOLIS,,AHMEDABAD vs. JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE-9,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 3093/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Mar 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C.S. Sharma, Sr. D.R
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

bogus purchases calculated at 12.5% of the purchases which is excessive when no such disallowance is called. The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee reiterated that assessee had provided all details and evidences and vide reply dated 24-02- 2014, copy of PAN card of parties, confirmation of ledger account duly signed by parties, copies of invoices and delivery challan

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

43(3) r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act,1961 dtd.26.12.2016 holding the same as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. 2. The Learned Comm. of Income Tax, Ahmedabad -5 has erred in treating the purchase of standing teakwood timber of Rs.3,92,59,500/- as bogus only on the basis of statement of one of the partners

SHRI KIRTIKUMAR VASANTBHAI THAKKAR,,PATAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, PATAN

In the result, both the grounds of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3042/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri M. S. Chhajad, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R
Section 131(1)Section 147Section 148

section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, learned CIT (Appeals) erred in sustaining additions of Rs. 5,09,032 out of I.T.A No. 3042/Ahd/2014

M/S. GSP CROP SCIENCE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 892/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 250(6)Section 35

43,82,718 + 10,71,006/-) the claim of Assessee u/s 35(2AB) disregarding the submissions made by the Assessee. 4. Grievance raised by the assessee in the above ground is with respect to disallowance of claim of deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act amounting to Rs.54,53,724/-. The facts relating to the issue are that

M/S. GSP CROP SCIENCE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 891/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 250(6)Section 35

43,82,718 + 10,71,006/-) the claim of Assessee u/s 35(2AB) disregarding the submissions made by the Assessee. 4. Grievance raised by the assessee in the above ground is with respect to disallowance of claim of deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act amounting to Rs.54,53,724/-. The facts relating to the issue are that

SHRI SANDEEPKUMAR S. CHANDAK,,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, S.K. WARD-1,, HIMATNAGAR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3024/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Oct 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)

section 133(6) of the Act on making the payment of the requisite fees. 5.8 The payment against the purchases was not made in any of the case during the year under consideration. As such the payment was made in the subsequent year. In view of the above and after considering the information received from the Maharashtra sales tax department

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

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)

bogus. 25. On the other hand, the stand of the assessee is that it has purchased the gold. Thereafter, it was converted into 5-10 grams of coins which were distributed on festivities viz. Diwali and other occasions to its customers. Considering nature of the assessee’s business, and expenses incurred in earlier years, it, but natural that this must

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)

bogus. 25. On the other hand, the stand of the assessee is that it has purchased the gold. Thereafter, it was converted into 5-10 grams of coins which were distributed on festivities viz. Diwali and other occasions to its customers. Considering nature of the assessee’s business, and expenses incurred in earlier years, it, but natural that this must

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SAGARDEEP ALLOYS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1810/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

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

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

section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2011-12. 2. The brief facts of the case the assessee was engaged in trading of ferros and non-ferrous metals and manufacturing of copper, pipe, I.T.A No. 1810/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 2 DCIT

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 transactions without supporting documentation. The CIT(A), however, allowed the purchases as genuine after reviewing evidence submitted by the assessee. Gift, Boni, and Chandla The AO disallowed these expenses as non- Expenses business in nature. The CIT(A) partially allowed the expenses as promotional in nature but confirmed a portion as non-business