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.

64 results for “depreciation”+ Bogus Purchasesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai902Delhi393Kolkata106Ahmedabad103Jaipur101Bangalore84Chandigarh64Hyderabad61Amritsar57Pune54Chennai50Raipur34Indore30Nagpur29Surat23Lucknow20Guwahati12Visakhapatnam11Cuttack11Rajkot9Jodhpur9Allahabad9Dehradun5Karnataka4Agra4SC3Panaji2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Patna1Varanasi1Cochin1

Key Topics

Addition to Income43Section 26328Section 13(3)26Section 14823Section 143(3)18Depreciation16Disallowance12Section 143(2)11Section 250(6)10

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 923/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21
Section 148BSection 151

bogus purchases could be\nused to decrease the profit element?\n7.\nWhether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A)\nwas justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,92,51,910/- on account of\nbogus purchases and directing the AO to apply the G.P. rate @ 4% on the\nbogus purchases of Rs.1

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 922/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh

Showing 1–20 of 64 · Page 1 of 4

Section 14410
Exemption10
Limitation/Time-bar10
28 May 2025
AY 2019-20
Section 148BSection 151

bogus\npurchases of Rs.1,92,51,910/- by incorrectly relying on the judgment in the\ncase of M/s Pooja Paper Trading Co (P.) Ltd. [264 Taxman 260] - High Court of\nBombay and Geolife Organics Vs. ACIT [58 ITR(T) 297)-ITAT Mumbai.\n8.\nThe appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, vary, omit or substitute\nany of the aforesaid grounds

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 921/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-19
Section 148BSection 151

bogus\npurchases of Rs.1,92,51,910/- by incorrectly relying on the judgment in the\ncase of M/s Pooja Paper Trading Co (P.) Ltd. [264 Taxman 260] - High Court of\nBombay and Geolife Organics Vs. ACIT [58 ITR(T) 297)-ITAT Mumbai.\n8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, vary, omit or substitute\nany of the aforesaid grounds

ROSHA ALLOYS P LIMITED, AMLOH ROAD, VILLAGE TURAN, MANDI GOBINDGARH,PUNJAB vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 888/CHANDI/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-2019
Section 148BSection 151

bogus purchases could be\nused to decrease the profit element?\n7.\nWhether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A)\nwas justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,92,51,910/- on account of\nbogus purchases and directing the AO to apply the G.P. rate @ 4% on the\nbogus purchases of Rs.1

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD, CHANDIGARH

ITA 556/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12
For Respondent: \nThe DCIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

bogus bills of purchase\n(cotton purchases) to the beneficiary companies/entities who in turn purchase\nthe raw material in cash from other persons. The modus operandi involved in\nthese cases is that these proprietary concerns receive payments from the\nbeneficiary companies through various modes like RTGS/ CHEQUES/BANK\nTRASNFERS/ and the amount is immediately withdrawn as cash and returned to\nthe

WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 528/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus bills of purchase (cotton purchases) to the beneficiary companies/entities who in turn purchase the raw material in cash from other persons. The modus operandi involved in these cases is that these proprietary concerns receive payments from the beneficiary companies through various modes like RTGS/ CHEQUES/BANK TRASNFERS/ and the amount is immediately withdrawn as cash and returned to the beneficiaries

M/S SIGMA CARTRONS PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, LUDHIANA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 662/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv SharmaFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Sinha

depreciation of Rs. 33,93,652/- holding that the machinery purchased by the assessee with written down value of Rs.2,26,24,345/-is bogus

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. APEEJAY EDUCATION SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross objection

ITA 64/CHANDI/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrir.L Negi

For Appellant: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CITFor Respondent: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate and Shri Sumit Lal Chandani Advocate
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus purchase and disallowance of depreciation apart from addition u/s 11(5) of the Act, holding the software purchase from

SH. PARSHOTAM GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 154/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

purchases shown from such sundry creditors were also held to be doubtful. The AO observed that the assessee had shown bogus debtors and creditors to book bogus loss. Moreover, since the assessee had also failed to produce the books of accounts, it was concluded that the assessee had declared huge loss just to adjust the income surrendered at the time

M/S PARDEEP ISPAT(P) LTD.,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 150/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

purchases shown from such sundry creditors were also held to be doubtful. The AO observed that the assessee had shown bogus debtors and creditors to book bogus loss. Moreover, since the assessee had also failed to produce the books of accounts, it was concluded that the assessee had declared huge loss just to adjust the income surrendered at the time

PRIYANKA,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 152/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

purchases shown from such sundry creditors were also held to be doubtful. The AO observed that the assessee had shown bogus debtors and creditors to book bogus loss. Moreover, since the assessee had also failed to produce the books of accounts, it was concluded that the assessee had declared huge loss just to adjust the income surrendered at the time

SHRI RAJEEV GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 149/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

purchases shown from such sundry creditors were also held to be doubtful. The AO observed that the assessee had shown bogus debtors and creditors to book bogus loss. Moreover, since the assessee had also failed to produce the books of accounts, it was concluded that the assessee had declared huge loss just to adjust the income surrendered at the time

PRIYA GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 151/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

purchases shown from such sundry creditors were also held to be doubtful. The AO observed that the assessee had shown bogus debtors and creditors to book bogus loss. Moreover, since the assessee had also failed to produce the books of accounts, it was concluded that the assessee had declared huge loss just to adjust the income surrendered at the time

SHRI. TARSEM GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 157/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

purchases shown from such sundry creditors were also held to be doubtful. The AO observed that the assessee had shown bogus debtors and creditors to book bogus loss. Moreover, since the assessee had also failed to produce the books of accounts, it was concluded that the assessee had declared huge loss just to adjust the income surrendered at the time

DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S GOLD STAR AMCO STEELS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the results, the book results as duly audited need to be accepted and the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted

ITA 1198/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: 30Th Of September 2013 And, As Such, Framing Of Assessment By The Assessing Officer Without Observing Mandatory

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manveet Singh Sehgal, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

purchase of capital assets and the documents available with the assessee were furnished before the ld CIT(A) which were sufficient enough to ensure that the capital addition done by the assessee was genuine and not bogus. It was accordingly submitted that the disallowance of depreciation

M/S GOLD STAR AMCO STEELS PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA

In the results, the book results as duly audited need to be accepted and the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted

ITA 1164/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: 30Th Of September 2013 And, As Such, Framing Of Assessment By The Assessing Officer Without Observing Mandatory

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manveet Singh Sehgal, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

purchase of capital assets and the documents available with the assessee were furnished before the ld CIT(A) which were sufficient enough to ensure that the capital addition done by the assessee was genuine and not bogus. It was accordingly submitted that the disallowance of depreciation

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. APEEJAY EDUCATION SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 65/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Meena, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. Sumit Lalachdani
Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 167B

depreciation of Rs. 1,08,40,363/- on ITA No. 65/Chd/2017- Apeejay Education Society, Jalandhar 4 account of bogus purchase

M/S SEL MANUFACTURING CO. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 362/CHANDI/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 148Section 250(6)Section 5(20)Section 5(21)Section 69CSection 7

bogus purchase of Rs. 8,13,85,737/-. 2. The following Additional Ground has also been raised: “That the order dated 29.12.2018 passed under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Ludhiana is against law and facts on the file in as much as the same has been passed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MOHALI PUNJAB vs. TAJ LAND DEVELOPEFRS AND PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED , SECTOR MOHALI PUNJAB

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 606/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: \nShri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nSmt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151

bogus bills had been debited to the Profit & Loss Account was\nincorrect which is evident from the fact that the Id. CIT(A) in his order passed\non merits has found these bills to be relating to purchase of fixed assets and has\naccordingly, made the disallowance of only depreciation

M/S COTTON CARE EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, LUDHIANA

ITA 490/CHANDI/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 490/Chd/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 M/S Cotton Care Exports Pvt. Ltd., The Addl Cit, Range-Iii, बनाम 2,Bal Singh Nagar, Rahon Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcc4099H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vibhor Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj, CIT DR
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153

purchase price of the cloth at Rs. 97 per kg and average sale price of entire cloth comes to Rs. 193 per kg and that sufficient profits have been returned by the assessee. Further, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has brought our attention to the various additions, some on account of excess claim of depreciation, some on account