Search: bogus purchases

5 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 546clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai105 Karnataka99 Delhi80 Jaipur27 Kolkata23 Chandigarh20 Bangalore16 Pune12 Surat10 Indore7 Visakhapatnam5 Amritsar5 Chennai5 Ahmedabad3 Hyderabad3 Lucknow2 Cuttack2 Raipur1 Rajkot1 Patna1 Varanasi1 Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 153A6 Section 143(3)4 Section 684 Section 143(1)4 Section 1484 Section 1323 Section 1473 Addition to Income3 Disallowance2

SHEETAL V. BHAT,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 272/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

546). Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the reopening of assessment is not justified. 3 I.T.A. No.272/Mds/17 3. On the contrary, Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the return of income was admittedly processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. It is not a case that there was no material for opening assessment. According

AADARSH SURANA, CHENNAI,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1840/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri. R.Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 47Section 68

546/– prior to transfer were revalued to Rs.134,94,13,602/- without any corroborative evidence or documentation. The AO held that the assessee had adopted a colourable device by relying on an inflated and unsubstantiated valuation to determine the consideration at Rs. 110.03 crore. 10. The AO also observed that neither the assessee nor the valuer had furnished concrete evidence

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MOHANLAL JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the all the appeals filed by the assessee is is partly allowed

ITA 1396/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 132Section 153A

PURCHASE BULLION PURCHASE BULLION 13750.00 ITA Nos.1178 to 1182/Chny/2025 to 1182/Chny/2025 & ITA Nos.1393 ITA Nos.1393 to 1397/Chny/2025 (AYs: 2017 : 2017-18 to 2021-22) M/s. Mohanlal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd M/s. Mohanlal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd ::29 :: (13750X99.5%) (13750X99.5%) ALLOY =91.70% ALLOY =91.70% 1169.57 Gold + Alloy Gold + Alloy 14919.57 GOLD WT (13750.00 X99.5) GOLD WT (13750.00 X99.5) 13681.25 BALANCE WT GHAT

MOHANLAL JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

ITA 1180/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

purchase of gold bullion and \nmanufacturing of gold ornaments is considered, the facts are entirely \ndifferent from the statement of Shri Rajendra Kothari as above. In the \nverification carried out by the AO in the remand proceedings, he had \nconcluded that the alloy is calculated on the basis of conversion of 24 \ncarat bullion into 22 carat gold ornaments

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MOHANLAL JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 1395/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

purchase of gold bullion and\nmanufacturing of gold ornaments is considered, the facts are entirely\ndifferent from the statement of Shri Rajendra Kothari as above. In the\nverification carried out by the AO in the remand proceedings, he had\nconcluded that the alloy is calculated on the basis of conversion of 24\ncarat bullion into 22 carat gold ornaments