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.

206 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 36(1)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,244Delhi955Jaipur329Kolkata221Chennai206Ahmedabad158Bangalore152Chandigarh142Karnataka116Pune96Surat87Hyderabad87Indore87Amritsar62Cochin59Rajkot54Nagpur50Raipur42Calcutta35Visakhapatnam33Guwahati32Lucknow32Allahabad23Jodhpur19Agra19Cuttack12Telangana9Varanasi6Ranchi5Panaji5Patna3SC3Jabalpur1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income61Section 153A58Section 13251Section 14848Section 271A35Section 40A(3)33Disallowance33Penalty32Section 25031

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1236/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 148Section 20Section 250

iii)an entry or entries in the books of account, which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more: lakh rupees or more: Provided that no notice under section

Showing 1–20 of 206 · Page 1 of 11

...
Section 13929
Section 153C29
Bogus Purchases17

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 1817/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 139Section 153CSection 250

36,677 1,29,61,697 3 Addition on a/c of unaccounted sale of Addition on a/c of unaccounted sale of NA 42,94,341 42,94,341 42,94,341 scrap 4 Addition on a/c of bogus CSR contribution of bogus CSR contribution NA 4,00,00,000 4,00,00,000 NA 3. It is noted that

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1256/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 148Section 20Section 250

iii)an entry or entries in the books of account, which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more: lakh rupees or more: Provided that no notice under section

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1257/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

bogus purchases from\nvendors of old liquor bottles and transportation & logistics services.\nConsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice(s) u/s\n148 of the Act dated 30-03-2023 was issued to the assessee for the\nrelevant AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17. The details of the return(s) of income\nfiled in response to notice

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1259/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

bogus purchases from\nvendors of old liquor bottles and transportation & logistics services.\nConsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice(s) u/s\n148 of the Act dated 30-03-2023 was issued to the assessee for the\nrelevant AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17. The details of the return(s) of income\nfiled in response to notice

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT.. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1231/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

bogus purchases from\nvendors of old liquor bottles and transportation & logistics services.\nConsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice(s) u/s\n148 of the Act dated 30-03-2023 was issued to the assessee for the\nrelevant AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17. The details of the return(s) of income\nfiled in response to notice

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1232/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

bogus purchases from\nvendors of old liquor bottles and transportation & logistics services.\nConsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice(s) u/s\n148 of the Act dated 30-03-2023 was issued to the assessee for the\nrelevant AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17. The details of the return(s) of income\nfiled in response to notice

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

ITA 1163/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

bogus purchases from\nvendors of old liquor bottles and transportation & logistics services.\nConsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice(s) u/s\n148 of the Act dated 30-03-2023 was issued to the assessee for the\nrelevant AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17. The details of the return(s) of income\nfiled in response to notice

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

ITA 1234/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

bogus purchases from\nvendors of old liquor bottles and transportation & logistics services.\nConsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice(s) u/s\n148 of the Act dated 30-03-2023 was issued to the assessee for the\nrelevant AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17. The details of the return(s) of income\nfiled in response to notice

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1238/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 153CSection 250

Section 153C of the Act fro analyzed the entire statutory framework of Section 153C of the Act fro analyzed the entire statutory framework of Section 153C of the Act from its introduction to the amendment by Finance Act, 2017 and its its introduction to the amendment by Finance Act, 2017 and its its introduction to the amendment by Finance

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1254/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 153CSection 250

Section 153C of the Act fro analyzed the entire statutory framework of Section 153C of the Act fro analyzed the entire statutory framework of Section 153C of the Act from its introduction to the amendment by Finance Act, 2017 and its its introduction to the amendment by Finance Act, 2017 and its its introduction to the amendment by Finance

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1552/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2022-23
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

36,677 1,29,61,697\n3\nAddition on a/c of unaccounted sale of\nscrap\nNA\n42,94,341 42,94,341\n4\nAddition on a/c of bogus CSR contribution\nΝΑ\n4,00,00,000\nNA\n3.\nIt is noted that the reasoning given by the AO for making the\naboveadditions/disallowances were verbatim same across all AYs. Hence,\nforthe sake

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1551/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

36,677 1,29,61,697\n3\nAddition on a/c of unaccounted sale of\nscrap\nNA\n42,94,341 42,94,341\n4\nAddition on a/c of bogus CSR contribution\nΝΑ\n4,00,00,000\nNA\n3.\nIt is noted that the reasoning given by the AO for making the\naboveadditions/disallowances were verbatim same across all AYs. Hence,\nforthe sake

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1818/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

36,677\n1,29,61,697\n3\nAddition on a/c of unaccounted sale of\nscrap\nNA\n42,94,341\n42,94,341\n4\nAddition on a/c of bogus CSR contribution\nΝΑ\n4,00,00,000\nNA\n3.\nIt is noted that the reasoning given by the AO for making the\naboveadditions/disallowances were verbatim same across all AYs. Hence,\nforthe sake

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1550/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

36,677\n1,29,61,697\n3\nAddition on a/c of unaccounted sale of\nscrap\nNA\n42,94,341\n42,94,341\n4\nAddition on a/c of bogus CSR contribution\nNA\n4,00,00,000\nNA\n3. It is noted that the reasoning given by the AO for making the\naboveadditions/disallowances were verbatim same across all AYs. Hence,\nforthe sake

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1819/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2022-23
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

36,677\n1,29,61,697\n3\nAddition on a/c of unaccounted sale of\nscrap\nNA\n42,94,341\n42,94,341\n4\nAddition on a/c of bogus CSR contribution\nΝΑ\n4,00,00,000\nNA\n\n3. It is noted that the reasoning given by the AO for making the\naboveadditions/disallowances were verbatim same across all AYs. Hence,\nforthe

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1237/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 153CSection 250Section 80G

36 ::\nITA Nos.1254, 1255, 1258, 1260/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1233, 1235, 1237, 1238/Chny/2025\n(AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18)\nM/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd.\n'asset' had escaped assessment qua AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 and\ntherefore we are in agreement with the Ld. CIT(A) that, the 'jurisdictional\nfact' as prescribed under the fourth proviso to Section 153A

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 1258/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 153CSection 250Section 80G

36 ::\nITA Nos.1254, 1255, 1258, 1260/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1233, 1235, 1237, 1238/Chny/2025\n(AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18)\nM/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd.\n'asset' had escaped assessment qua AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 and\ntherefore we are in agreement with the Ld. CIT(A) that, the 'jurisdictional\nfact' as prescribed under the fourth proviso to Section 153A

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

36,22,227 4. As mentioned at para 3 (vii) above, for denying the exemption claimed under Section 11 of the Act, ld. Assessing Officer had cited certain specific instances which, according to him, attracted the rigours of Section 13(1) (c) of the Act. These are listed hereunder:- (i) An agreement for purchase of 22.34 acres of land

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

36,22,227 4. As mentioned at para 3 (vii) above, for denying the exemption claimed under Section 11 of the Act, ld. Assessing Officer had cited certain specific instances which, according to him, attracted the rigours of Section 13(1) (c) of the Act. These are listed hereunder:- (i) An agreement for purchase of 22.34 acres of land