Search: depreciation | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

73 results for “depreciation”+ Bogus Purchasesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai901 Delhi395 Kolkata107 Bangalore84 Jaipur75 Ahmedabad73 Amritsar57 Chennai52 Chandigarh44 Hyderabad32 Raipur31 Indore28 Lucknow22 Pune22 Nagpur21 Surat21 Guwahati12 Visakhapatnam10 Rajkot10 Jodhpur9 Allahabad9 Dehradun5 Karnataka4 Cuttack4 Agra3 SC3 Panaji2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Cochin1 Varanasi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income63 Disallowance50 Section 143(3)42 Depreciation38 Section 14A29 Section 6827 Section 14821 Section 14718 Section 115J15 Section 271(1)(c)

DUBOND PRODUCTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1004/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Tej Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 250(6)

Bogus purchases (ii) Depreciation on plant and machinery purchased during the year and (iii) freight outward expenses. 3. The same

XCELRIS LABS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 32/AHD/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad

Showing 1–20 of 73 · Page 1 of 4

15

21 Jul 2025

AY 2010-11

For Appellant: \nShri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: \nShri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)Section 43(1)

purchase of assets\namounting to Rs.55,32,934/- and\nii. depreciation pertaining to bogus purchase of assets amounting\nto Rs.7

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. APPLITECH SOLUTION LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 247/AHD/2020[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kshatriya &For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR &

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148

purchased the computers from Rahul Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Vandan Computers Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Design Tech Computers and M/s. Soft Design was ITA Nos. 246 & 247/Ahd/2020 & CO Nos.74 & 75/Ahd/2020 Assessee : Applitech Solution Limited AYs : 1999-2000 & 2001-2002 3 held to be bogus and depreciation

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 l2.5% of the Gross Profit when no such disallowance is called for. I.T.A Nos. 3140/Ahd/2015 & 3093/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 3 DCIT vs. Unique Metropolis Further Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the purchases were made from genuine parties. 2. In law and in facts and circumstances of the appellant's case

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 l2.5% of the Gross Profit when no such disallowance is called for. I.T.A Nos. 3140/Ahd/2015 & 3093/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 3 DCIT vs. Unique Metropolis Further Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the purchases were made from genuine parties. 2. In law and in facts and circumstances of the appellant's case

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

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

ITA 1520/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Advocate & Shri Parin Shah

Section 10Section 115JSection 28

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

ITA 1463/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Advocate & Shri Parin Shah

Section 10Section 115JSection 28

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

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

ITA 1519/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Advocate & Shri Parin Shah

Section 10Section 115JSection 28

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

ITA 1462/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Advocate & Shri Parin Shah

Section 10Section 115JSection 28

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases

ACIT-3(1)(1), AMBAWADI vs. OMSHIV FABRICSHUB PVT. LTD., NAVRANGPURA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1098/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1098/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Asstt. Year: 2013-2014

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri RN Dsouza, CIT. DR

Section 129Section 131Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

purchases, bogus sales and bogus expenditure to accommodate the assessee. The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) relied upon the order of the Hon’ble Settlement Commission which cannot be the sole criteria to restrict the disallowance. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in grey cloth on wholesale. The assessee

ASHAPURA STONE INDUSTRIES,ANAND vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 NOW WARD-1, ANAND

ITA 28/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member 1. Ita No.27/Ahd/2024 2. Ita No.28/Ahd/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 (Respectively) Ashapura Stone Industries The Income Tax Officer Nh No.8, Nr. Geb Sub-Station Vs Ward-3 (Now Ward-1) Vasad – 388 306 (Gujarat) Anand Pan: Aaufa 6762 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.T. Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Pertain To Different Assessment Years, But Involve Common Issues (Except Quantum In Appeal) & Hence Are Being Decided Together For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Appeals Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) - [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2012-13 & 2013-14, Both Dated 16/11/2023, Arising Out Of Assessment Orders Passed For Respective Assessment Years By Assessing Officer

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 69

depreciation of Rs.16,25,849/- claimed by the ITA Nos.27 & 28/Ahd/2024 Ashapura Stone Industries vs. ITO Asst. Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 assessee u/s.32 of the Act as the purchase of machinery was considered as bogus

ASHAPURA STONE INDUSTRIES,ANAND vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 NOW WARD-1, ANAND

ITA 27/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member 1. Ita No.27/Ahd/2024 2. Ita No.28/Ahd/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 (Respectively) Ashapura Stone Industries The Income Tax Officer Nh No.8, Nr. Geb Sub-Station Vs Ward-3 (Now Ward-1) Vasad – 388 306 (Gujarat) Anand Pan: Aaufa 6762 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.T. Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Pertain To Different Assessment Years, But Involve Common Issues (Except Quantum In Appeal) & Hence Are Being Decided Together For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Appeals Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) - [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2012-13 & 2013-14, Both Dated 16/11/2023, Arising Out Of Assessment Orders Passed For Respective Assessment Years By Assessing Officer

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 69

depreciation of Rs.16,25,849/- claimed by the ITA Nos.27 & 28/Ahd/2024 Ashapura Stone Industries vs. ITO Asst. Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 assessee u/s.32 of the Act as the purchase of machinery was considered as bogus

AZURE KNOWLEDGE CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2012/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)

purchase of software was treated as bogus and the AO had disallowed the depreciation of Rs.71,25,000/- claimed thereon

M/S. FLOURISH PUREFOODS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-2(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 30/AHD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyali.T(Ss).A. No.518/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Flourish Purefoods Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 11-12, Ecs House, Garden View, Tax, Nr. Global Hospital, Bodakdev, Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad-380054 Ahmedabad [Pan No.Aadcv2683B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R

Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 68

depreciation of Rs. 18,92,228/- on capital assets purchased from J S Enterprise for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2015-16. However, during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that M/s J S Enterprise was not traceable, and there was no valid address for the company. Based on the Inspector's report, the AO observed that the Claris Group

M/S. HARSIDDH QUARRY WORKS,ARAVALLI vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 103/AHD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.103/Ahd/2022 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 M/S. Harsiddh Quarry Works, Principal Commissioner Of At Alva (Vatrak), Vs. Income Tax, Taluka Bayad, Ahmedabad. District Aravalli, Alva(Vaarak)-383325. Pan: Aaifh0303H

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 69

bogus purchase, then he could not make any other addition. This aspect has been settled by the series of judgments. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Pvt. Ltd. reported in 331 ITR 296 has held as under: The Shorter Oxford Dictionary defines the expression "also" to mean 'further, in addition, besides

THE DCIT(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2578/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

depreciation even if it is not claimed by the assessee if assets are owned ITA No. 1785/Ahd/2012 & 08 others Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT(OSD) Asst.Years–2009-10, 2010-11, 2008-09, 2014-15 & 2015-16 and put to use by the assessee. Thus, Ground No. 6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed

THE DCIT(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1129/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

depreciation even if it is not claimed by the assessee if assets are owned ITA No. 1785/Ahd/2012 & 08 others Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT(OSD) Asst.Years–2009-10, 2010-11, 2008-09, 2014-15 & 2015-16 and put to use by the assessee. Thus, Ground No. 6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1785/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

depreciation even if it is not claimed by the assessee if assets are owned ITA No. 1785/Ahd/2012 & 08 others Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT(OSD) Asst.Years–2009-10, 2010-11, 2008-09, 2014-15 & 2015-16 and put to use by the assessee. Thus, Ground No. 6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2652/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

depreciation even if it is not claimed by the assessee if assets are owned ITA No. 1785/Ahd/2012 & 08 others Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT(OSD) Asst.Years–2009-10, 2010-11, 2008-09, 2014-15 & 2015-16 and put to use by the assessee. Thus, Ground No. 6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1358/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

depreciation even if it is not claimed by the assessee if assets are owned ITA No. 1785/Ahd/2012 & 08 others Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT(OSD) Asst.Years–2009-10, 2010-11, 2008-09, 2014-15 & 2015-16 and put to use by the assessee. Thus, Ground No. 6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed