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.

2 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 55Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5Ahmedabad3Amritsar3Delhi3Pune2Bangalore2Kolkata2Indore1

Key Topics

Section 50C4Section 1472Section 1482Section 1442Addition to Income2Survey u/s 133A2

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BENGALURU vs. HIREHAL JAIRAJ BALRAM, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1961/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: FixedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2025AY 2020-21
Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 50C

Section 55A of the Transfer of the Property Act cannot\nbe attracted and there is no transfer even in terms of\nsection 2(47)(v) of the Act. 29. In light of aforesaid\ndiscussions and in the entirety of facts and circumstances\nof the case and following the decisions referred supra, we\nhereby affirm the findings

SRI. K. SATISH KUMAR,BENGALURU vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-9, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1988/BANG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 133A(1)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234A

bogus expenditure on the basis of DVO report obtained by AO u/s 142A of the Act. 5.2.1 This issue was originally came for consideration in the assessment year 2006-07 before this Tribunal in ITA No.444/Bang/2009 vide order dated 17.7.2009 made an observation as follows:- “2. The first grievance of the appellant is against the addition of Rs.7