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.

21 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 12Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi92Kolkata58Mumbai49Bangalore46Calcutta34Jaipur24Chennai21Chandigarh15Indore10Ahmedabad10Pune8Rajkot8Lucknow6Nagpur4Agra3Amritsar2Karnataka2Varanasi1Jodhpur1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 6847Section 14817Section 12A16Section 1112Addition to Income10Section 13(1)8Section 44A7Section 133A7Survey u/s 133A7Section 80G

SIR CV RAMAN EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2941/CHNY/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. S

For Appellant: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N., CIT
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

bogus or non-genuine. Likewise, he explained that the erstwhile trustees had raised loans from their known associates/friends to finance the acquisition of land for educational purposes and it was due to lack of financial resources that the loans could not be repaid nor any interest was paid on such loans. The Ld. AR submitted that, the non-repayment

SIR CV RAMAN EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

6
Exemption6
Cash Deposit6

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2940/CHNY/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. S

For Appellant: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N., CIT
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

bogus or non-genuine. Likewise, he explained that the erstwhile trustees had raised loans from their known associates/friends to finance the acquisition of land for educational purposes and it was due to lack of financial resources that the loans could not be repaid nor any interest was paid on such loans. The Ld. AR submitted that, the non-repayment

DICT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. GSNR RICE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2407/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2407, 2408, 2409, 2410 & 2411/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Dcit, M/S. Gsnr Rice Industries Corporate Circle – 2(1), V. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. (Formerly Known As M/S. Snr Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd.,) No.21, C V Raman Raod, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aamcs 5834P

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri V. Nagaprasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 44ASection 68

12A) and section 44AA. The judicial analysis of books of account and the dictum given by the Bombay High Court in case of Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT [2002] (256 ITR 20) (Bom.), leaves no room for any possible doubt that credit in bank account simply or any other raw information available to Assessing Officer cannot be loosely called as books

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI vs. SHRI KANAKKILIANALLUR NARAYANA REDDIYAR MANIVANNAN,, TIRUPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2406/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2407, 2408, 2409, 2410 & 2411/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Dcit, M/S. Gsnr Rice Industries Corporate Circle – 2(1), V. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. (Formerly Known As M/S. Snr Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd.,) No.21, C V Raman Raod, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aamcs 5834P

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri V. Nagaprasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 44ASection 68

12A) and section 44AA. The judicial analysis of books of account and the dictum given by the Bombay High Court in case of Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT [2002] (256 ITR 20) (Bom.), leaves no room for any possible doubt that credit in bank account simply or any other raw information available to Assessing Officer cannot be loosely called as books

ITO, NCW - I (4),, CHENNAI vs. SHRI KANAKILLIYANALLUR NARAYANAN NEHRU,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2825/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2407, 2408, 2409, 2410 & 2411/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Dcit, M/S. Gsnr Rice Industries Corporate Circle – 2(1), V. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. (Formerly Known As M/S. Snr Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd.,) No.21, C V Raman Raod, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aamcs 5834P

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri V. Nagaprasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 44ASection 68

12A) and section 44AA. The judicial analysis of books of account and the dictum given by the Bombay High Court in case of Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT [2002] (256 ITR 20) (Bom.), leaves no room for any possible doubt that credit in bank account simply or any other raw information available to Assessing Officer cannot be loosely called as books

DICT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. GSNR RICE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2411/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2407, 2408, 2409, 2410 & 2411/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Dcit, M/S. Gsnr Rice Industries Corporate Circle – 2(1), V. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. (Formerly Known As M/S. Snr Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd.,) No.21, C V Raman Raod, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aamcs 5834P

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri V. Nagaprasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 44ASection 68

12A) and section 44AA. The judicial analysis of books of account and the dictum given by the Bombay High Court in case of Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT [2002] (256 ITR 20) (Bom.), leaves no room for any possible doubt that credit in bank account simply or any other raw information available to Assessing Officer cannot be loosely called as books

DICT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. GSNR RICE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2408/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2407, 2408, 2409, 2410 & 2411/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Dcit, M/S. Gsnr Rice Industries Corporate Circle – 2(1), V. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. (Formerly Known As M/S. Snr Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd.,) No.21, C V Raman Raod, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aamcs 5834P

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri V. Nagaprasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 44ASection 68

12A) and section 44AA. The judicial analysis of books of account and the dictum given by the Bombay High Court in case of Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT [2002] (256 ITR 20) (Bom.), leaves no room for any possible doubt that credit in bank account simply or any other raw information available to Assessing Officer cannot be loosely called as books

DICT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. GSNR RICE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2410/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2407, 2408, 2409, 2410 & 2411/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Dcit, M/S. Gsnr Rice Industries Corporate Circle – 2(1), V. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. (Formerly Known As M/S. Snr Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd.,) No.21, C V Raman Raod, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aamcs 5834P

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri V. Nagaprasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 44ASection 68

12A) and section 44AA. The judicial analysis of books of account and the dictum given by the Bombay High Court in case of Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT [2002] (256 ITR 20) (Bom.), leaves no room for any possible doubt that credit in bank account simply or any other raw information available to Assessing Officer cannot be loosely called as books

DICT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. GSNR RICE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2409/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2407, 2408, 2409, 2410 & 2411/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Dcit, M/S. Gsnr Rice Industries Corporate Circle – 2(1), V. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. (Formerly Known As M/S. Snr Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd.,) No.21, C V Raman Raod, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aamcs 5834P

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri V. Nagaprasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 44ASection 68

12A) and section 44AA. The judicial analysis of books of account and the dictum given by the Bombay High Court in case of Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT [2002] (256 ITR 20) (Bom.), leaves no room for any possible doubt that credit in bank account simply or any other raw information available to Assessing Officer cannot be loosely called as books

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2219/CHNY/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

bogus and therefore the question of limiting the disallowance to such amounts did not arise. According to him, assessee clearly lost the benefit of Section 11 of the Act. Submission of the ld. Departmental Representative was that even a small benefit ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 41 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 derived by the trustees was enough to deprive the trust

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2220/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

bogus and therefore the question of limiting the disallowance to such amounts did not arise. According to him, assessee clearly lost the benefit of Section 11 of the Act. Submission of the ld. Departmental Representative was that even a small benefit ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 41 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 derived by the trustees was enough to deprive the trust

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2125/CHNY/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

bogus and therefore the question of limiting the disallowance to such amounts did not arise. According to him, assessee clearly lost the benefit of Section 11 of the Act. Submission of the ld. Departmental Representative was that even a small benefit ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 41 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 derived by the trustees was enough to deprive the trust

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2126/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

bogus and therefore the question of limiting the disallowance to such amounts did not arise. According to him, assessee clearly lost the benefit of Section 11 of the Act. Submission of the ld. Departmental Representative was that even a small benefit ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 41 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 derived by the trustees was enough to deprive the trust

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADURAI vs. STANDARD FIREWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED, SIVAKASI, TAMILNADU

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross-Objections\nfiled by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 584/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2014-15
Section 12ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 68Section 80G

Section 12A registered\norganization which was also added by the AO. The Ld.CIT(A) noted that\nall the records including the audited financials and data from the\ncomputerized register maintained in its Oracle software were retrieved by\nthe Investigation Team and was before the AO while he was scrutinizing\nthe assessment which resulted in additions made

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. M/S. STANDARD FIREWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED, SIVAKASI, TAMILNADU

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross-Objections

ITA 583/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.M. Mohan Babu, Addl.CIT
Section 12ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 68Section 80G

Section 12A registered organization which was also added by the AO. The Ld.CIT(A) noted that all the records including the audited financials and data from the computerized register maintained in its Oracle software were retrieved by the Investigation Team and was before the AO while he was scrutinizing the assessment which resulted in additions made

MICKY FIREWORKS INDUSTRIES,SIVAKASI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, MADURAI

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 264/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.264/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Micky Fireworks Industries Acit बनाम 74, Velayutham Road, Non-Corporate Circle-2, / Vs. Sivakasi-626 123. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaqfm-1108-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri V. Rajasekaran (Ca) - Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26-07-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri V. Rajasekaran (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

12A, Perumal Konar Street, VPC Nagar, Coimbatore South, Coimbatore. (ITA No.527 /Chny/2022). As is evident, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of addition of Rs.118.23 Lacs u/s 68 which represent cash deposited by assessee during demonetization period. 2. Supporting the case of the assessee, Ld. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is engaged in fireworks and made substantial sales during

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 572/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

bogus. Hence, proper investigation regarding these loans is necessary.” He submitted that Supreme Court did not find that these were sufficient reasons for reopening the assessment. With regard to the sentence ‘hence, proper investigation regarding these loans is necessary’, the Supreme Court observed that this - - 5 ITA 568 to 572/M/17 conclusion that there is a case for investigation

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 571/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

bogus. Hence, proper investigation regarding these loans is necessary.” He submitted that Supreme Court did not find that these were sufficient reasons for reopening the assessment. With regard to the sentence ‘hence, proper investigation regarding these loans is necessary’, the Supreme Court observed that this - - 5 ITA 568 to 572/M/17 conclusion that there is a case for investigation

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 570/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

bogus. Hence, proper investigation regarding these loans is necessary.” He submitted that Supreme Court did not find that these were sufficient reasons for reopening the assessment. With regard to the sentence ‘hence, proper investigation regarding these loans is necessary’, the Supreme Court observed that this - - 5 ITA 568 to 572/M/17 conclusion that there is a case for investigation

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 569/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

bogus. Hence, proper investigation regarding these loans is necessary.” He submitted that Supreme Court did not find that these were sufficient reasons for reopening the assessment. With regard to the sentence ‘hence, proper investigation regarding these loans is necessary’, the Supreme Court observed that this - - 5 ITA 568 to 572/M/17 conclusion that there is a case for investigation