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.

236 results for “bogus purchases”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,842Delhi1,170Kolkata520Jaipur335Chennai326Ahmedabad236Bangalore150Chandigarh145Indore123Hyderabad120Pune108Surat104Nagpur81Cochin60Rajkot58Raipur51Lucknow46Guwahati42Calcutta40Agra34Amritsar31Visakhapatnam30Allahabad30Jodhpur26Cuttack24Patna18Jabalpur8Ranchi7Karnataka5SC3Telangana2Orissa2Dehradun2Panaji1Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 68107Addition to Income90Section 14771Section 14850Section 143(3)41Section 69A41Unexplained Cash Credit36Section 25031Section 143(2)28

RAVIKUMAR KAMLESHBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 497/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. S. Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharninath V. S., Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 145Section 68

purchase and corresponding bogus cash sales. As the assessee could not prove the genuineness of the retail sale shown, which as per assessee is the basis of mounting cash in hand, and also the efforts made by this office by issuing notices u/s.133(6) of the IT Act were failed due to non-confirmation from the parties with whom sales/purchases

Showing 1–20 of 236 · Page 1 of 12

...
Disallowance28
Cash Deposit25
Bogus/Accommodation Entry24

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

purchases are bogus then it is implied that sales are also bogus. Therefore the amount of sale shown by the assessee in the books of accounts amounting to Rs. 4,02,01,728/- should have been treated as unexplained cash credit

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

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. Assessee before the learned CIT (A) has furnished the copies of the income tax return filed by MD but the learned CIT (A) without considering the same insisted for financial statements of MD. If the assessee has not furnished the details of MD, then the CIT (A) could have easily collected

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

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. Assessee before the learned CIT (A) has furnished the copies of the income tax return filed by MD but the learned CIT (A) without considering the same insisted for financial statements of MD. If the assessee has not furnished the details of MD, then the CIT (A) could have easily collected

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

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. Assessee before the learned CIT (A) has furnished the copies of the income tax return filed by MD but the learned CIT (A) without considering the same insisted for financial statements of MD. If the assessee has not furnished the details of MD, then the CIT (A) could have easily collected

SHRI HAJI MOHMMADSAFI ABDULREHMAN SHAIKH,BARODA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3 (1),, BARODA

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

ITA 1690/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Apr 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri/Ms. Sonia Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 instead of disallowance of purchases. (xi) Jubir Husssain U.:- The appellant has shown purchases of Rs. 73,48,000/- from this party. On perusal of confirmed copy of contract given to the abvoe mentioned party. To support the claim of. expenditure, copy of return of Shri Jubir Hussain U. has filed wherein he has offered

AKAR LAMINATORS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1) (ASSTT. ORDER PASSING AUTHORITY) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(1) (CURRENT JURISDICTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 716/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 May 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT D.R. & Ms. Saumya Pandey
Section 144Section 148Section 68

purchase invoices. The assessee also filed a copy of the bank statement showing the receipt of money from the impugned party. The learned AR also filed the affidavit of the party demonstrating that transaction of sale was genuine. 12. On the other hand, the ld. DR before us submitted that the ledger account does not establish that the transactions between

AKAR LAMINATORS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1) (ASTT. ORDER PASSSING AUTHORITY) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(1) (CURRENT JURISDICTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 717/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 May 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT D.R. & Ms. Saumya Pandey
Section 144Section 148Section 68

purchase invoices. The assessee also filed a copy of the bank statement showing the receipt of money from the impugned party. The learned AR also filed the affidavit of the party demonstrating that transaction of sale was genuine. 12. On the other hand, the ld. DR before us submitted that the ledger account does not establish that the transactions between

HARSHVARDHAN T.SONI,DAHOD vs. THE ACIT, PANCHAMAHAL CIRCLE, GODHRA PRESENT JURISDICTION THE ACIT., ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri M K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 271ASection 68

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. Penalty proceeding u/s. 271AAC(1) is initiated for income deemed u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act…” 5. Aggrieved against the Assessment Order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed the addition by observing as under: 6.3 I have considered the facts on record and the submission

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. REKHA INDRAVADAN CHOKSHI, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the Department’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 287/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)

bogus and fabricated. The assessing officer also observed that cash sales were intentionally bifurcated into small amounts in order to keep the sale value below Rs. 2 lacs to avoid mentioning PAN of the cash purchaser. Therefore, in nutshell, the total purchases of Rs. 25,90,09,722/- recorded in the books of accounts during the demonetization period

REKHABEN INDRAVADAN CHOKSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-5(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the Department’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 270/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)

bogus and fabricated. The assessing officer also observed that cash sales were intentionally bifurcated into small amounts in order to keep the sale value below Rs. 2 lacs to avoid mentioning PAN of the cash purchaser. Therefore, in nutshell, the total purchases of Rs. 25,90,09,722/- recorded in the books of accounts during the demonetization period

ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KRAFT LAMINATE, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1841/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Years : 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Kraft Laminate, Income-Tax, Vs C/O. Laxmi Timber, Nr. Circle 3(2), Ahmedabad Mahalaxmi Textile Mill, Opp. Rajbai Patel Timber Market, Narol Naroda Highway, Narol, Ahmedabad-382405 Pan : Aamfk 8120 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Assessee By : Shri Manish J. Shah, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-:

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 68

unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Act. Ground No.2 of the Revenue’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 11. The issue raised in Ground No.3 relates to the deletion by the learned CIT(A) of the addition of Rs.4,72,176/- made by the Assessing Officer by way of disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Act. 12. During

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)

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 amount to total income of assessee - Commissioner (Appeals) was of opinion that purchases

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)

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 amount to total income of assessee - Commissioner (Appeals) was of opinion that purchases

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)

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 amount to total income of assessee - Commissioner (Appeals) was of opinion that purchases

M/S. PUSHPAK BULLION PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1771/AHD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Jurisdictional High Court & The Hon’Ble Gujarat High Court Dismissed The Writ Petition Filed By The Assessee Vide Judgment Dated 27-06-2016 In Sca No. 18512 Of 2015 & Upheld The Validity Of The Reassessment Notice.

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

purchasing the goods or otherwise, has not been proved, even though the transactions were made through banking channels. 7.4 After considering all the factual and legal aspects of the case, the addition of Rs.14,17,30,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act is sustained and the ground no.1.2 of the appeal is dismissed. …………………… Assessing Officer being unexplained credits

ITO WARD-4(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. VALLEY COMTRADE PVT LTD ( EARLIER KNOWN AS JHAWAR COMTRADE PVT. LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2034/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2034/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 I.T.O, M/S. Valley Comtrade Pvt. Ltd., Ward-4(1)(4), Vs. (Earlier Known As Jhawar Comtrade Ahmedabad. Pvt. Ltd.,) C-205, Titanium Square, Near Parsoli Bmw Showroom, Thaltej Chokdi, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aadcs3553N & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 68/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 M/S. Valley Comtrade Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O, (Earlier Known As Jhawar Comtrade Vs. Ward-1(1)(3), Pvt. Ltd.,) Surat. C-205, Titanium Square, Near Parsoli Bmw Showroom, Thaltej Chokdi, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aadcs3553N

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT. D.R with Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.D.R
Section 13(1)(d)Section 68

unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. 2. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in relying upon the report of DDIT(lnv.), Koikata, regarding the 5 companies, for giving relief of Rs 7,10.00,000/- even though in the reports there is no comment on the creditworthiness of these companies or the genuineness of transactions

SADBHAV ENGINEERING LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed\nand that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 235/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2018-19
For Respondent: \nShri H. Phani Raju, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 69ASection 80I

credit were transferred to persons who works in\njewellery business like as evident in the case M/s. Pradeepkumar Babulal & Co.\nAmount transferred to jewelers were taken in cash since there is no dearth of cash in hand of\nJewelers which was generated from retails jewellery sales.\nThe amount withdrawn from bank or taken in cash from jeweler in lieu

JHAVERI TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 402/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR
Section 132(4)Section 68

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act vide letter dated 18th of March 2015. The assessee was also directed to produce the directors of the companies from whom it has received one time entry discussed above by 23 March 2015. The assessee was also provided with the relevant statements and the documents which was duly acknowledged

JHAVERI TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 401/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR
Section 132(4)Section 68

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act vide letter dated 18th of March 2015. The assessee was also directed to produce the directors of the companies from whom it has received one time entry discussed above by 23 March 2015. The assessee was also provided with the relevant statements and the documents which was duly acknowledged