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.

18 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 14Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai476Delhi199Kolkata103Karnataka99Ahmedabad74Chennai46Amritsar34Jaipur32Pune23Indore21Raipur19Bangalore18Visakhapatnam13Lucknow7Surat6Rajkot5Cuttack3Chandigarh3Hyderabad3Panaji3Nagpur2Dehradun2Orissa2Ranchi1Patna1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)34Disallowance18Section 153C17Depreciation17Addition to Income17Section 372

M/S SHYAMARAJU & COMPANY PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2009/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S DIVYASHREE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2004/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S DIVYASHREE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2002/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S SHAMARAJU & COMPANY PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2011/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S SHYAMARAJU & COMPANY PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2012/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S DIVYASHREE INFRASTRUCTURE ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 1999/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S DIVYASREE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2005/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S DIVYASHREE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2000/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S SHYAMARAJU & COMPANY INDIA PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2142/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S SHAMARAJU & COMPANY INDIA PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2143/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S DIVYASHREE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2003/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S DIVYASHREE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2001/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S SHYAMARAJU & COMPANY PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2010/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S. SHYAMARAJU & COMPANY PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2007/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S. SHYAMARAJU & COMPANY PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2006/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

M/S. SHYAMARAJU & COMPANY PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2008/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S SHAMARAJU & COMPANY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees, viz

ITA 2144/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153C

bogus or inflation of expenses, in the respective years. In our considered view, without making addition of alleged bogus/inflated expenses, the A.O. could not have disallowed the depreciation alone in A.Y. 2014-15. Accordingly, we are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation made by the A.O. in assessment year 2014-15 is not justified in the facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S BIOWORTH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 679/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, C.A by RevenueFor Respondent: Shri K Sankar Ganesh, JCIT (DR) by
Section 133(6)Section 37

section 37 of Income Tax Act, 1961 and added to the total income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of Act is initiated separately.[Addition Rs.33,00,000/-]” 2.2 Accordingly he added into the total income of the assessee the entire payments made to these two companies of Rs.33.00/- crores. 2.3 During the course of assessment proceedings