BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

495 results for “bogus purchases”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,029Delhi495Jaipur207Chennai178Kolkata127Ahmedabad118Bangalore100Chandigarh97Hyderabad69Raipur66Surat62Indore62Cochin58Visakhapatnam45Pune42Nagpur39Rajkot36Allahabad32Lucknow31Guwahati27Jodhpur22Agra19Cuttack19Amritsar15Supreme Court12Dehradun8Varanasi7Ranchi7Patna5Panaji3Jabalpur2

Key Topics

Addition to Income74Section 143(3)38Section 153A37Section 6831Section 14828Section 14728Section 26326Section 153D23Disallowance22Deduction

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(2), NOIDA, NOIDA vs. BHAVYA PIPE INDUSTRY, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5107/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer, Bhavya Pipe Industry Ward-5(1)(2), Plot No. F-39, Site- C, Noida. Vs. Upsidc, Industrial Area, Surajpur ,Gautam Buddha Nagar, Gr. Noida-201306 Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Aatfb2209D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 136(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

bogus purchases and restricted the addition to a mere 5.66% which was the gross profit of the assessee. The findings of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court as upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court are as under- 2. "8. So far as the question regarding addition of Rs. 3,70,78,125/- as gross profit on sales of Rs.37.08

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Showing 1–20 of 495 · Page 1 of 25

...
18
Bogus Purchases18
Natural Justice16
ITA 6893/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6895/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6896/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. KUMAR BROTHERS CO. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7899/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. KUMAR BROTHERS CO. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7900/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. KUMAR BROTHERS CO. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7896/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6894/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. KUMAR BROTHERS CO. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7898/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6897/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. KUMAR BROTHERS CO. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7897/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 153C

deduction towards purchases. The present case where purchases were held to be bogus, those could have been disallowed. But that

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-18, NEW DELHI vs. JAGANANTH HEMCHAND JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7755/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 69C

purchase under challenge by the Revenue. As noted in the preceding paragraphs, a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was conducted on 03.10.2013 on Rajender Jain Group and Dharmichand Jain Group who are stated to be entry operators stationed at Mumbai and indulging in providing accommodation entries in the nature of bogus sales and unsecured loans

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-18, NEW DELHI vs. JAGANANTH HEMCHAND JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7754/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 69C

purchase under challenge by the Revenue. As noted in the preceding paragraphs, a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was conducted on 03.10.2013 on Rajender Jain Group and Dharmichand Jain Group who are stated to be entry operators stationed at Mumbai and indulging in providing accommodation entries in the nature of bogus sales and unsecured loans

ACIT CIRCLE-28(1), NEW DELHI vs. PINNACLE CLOTHING COMPANY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 679/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

bogus. Submission before the ld. CIT(A): 21. Before the ld. CIT(A), in order to explain the purchases made by the assessee from this supplier, the assessee furnished copy of gate entry register, GRs of Karam Transport Service and invoices of purchases from M/s Vrindavan International Trade Pvt. Ltd. The assessee also submitted the ledger accounts of this supplier

DCIT CIRCLE-28(1), NEW DELHI vs. PINNACLE CLOTHING COMPANY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5833/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

bogus. Submission before the ld. CIT(A): 21. Before the ld. CIT(A), in order to explain the purchases made by the assessee from this supplier, the assessee furnished copy of gate entry register, GRs of Karam Transport Service and invoices of purchases from M/s Vrindavan International Trade Pvt. Ltd. The assessee also submitted the ledger accounts of this supplier

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD vs. SHRI IRFAN S/O SH. MEHARBAN, BULANDSHAHR

In the result, ground No.4 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3519/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Bharti Sharma, Adv &For Respondent: Ms. Amish S Gupt, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

bogus purchases for which ultimate beneficiary was M/s HMA Agro Industries Ltd. 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)- IV, Kanpur has erred in deleting the addition Rs.62,11,24,560/- made under Section 68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to discharge

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD vs. SHRI IRFAN S/O SH. MEHARBAN, BULANDSHAHAR

In the result, ground No.4 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3520/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Bharti Sharma, Adv &For Respondent: Ms. Amish S Gupt, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

bogus purchases for which ultimate beneficiary was M/s HMA Agro Industries Ltd. 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)- IV, Kanpur has erred in deleting the addition Rs.62,11,24,560/- made under Section 68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to discharge

VAKSONS METAPLAST PVT LTD,DELHI vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), DELHI

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

ITA 2218/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

bogus sale/purchase bills. During the assessment proceedings, Ld. AO issued various queries and show cause notices which were duly replied to by the assessee with the relevant documentary evidences. The following were the proceedings at the time of assessment/survey: - (i) As stated herein above, in the statement recorded at the time of survey (PB Pg. 33-47), the director

VAKSONS METAPLAST PVT LTD,DELHI vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), DELHI

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

ITA 2216/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

bogus sale/purchase bills. During the assessment proceedings, Ld. AO issued various queries and show cause notices which were duly replied to by the assessee with the relevant documentary evidences. The following were the proceedings at the time of assessment/survey: - (i) As stated herein above, in the statement recorded at the time of survey (PB Pg. 33-47), the director

VAKSONS METAPLAST PVT LTD,DELHI vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), DELHI

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

ITA 2217/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

bogus sale/purchase bills. During the assessment proceedings, Ld. AO issued various queries and show cause notices which were duly replied to by the assessee with the relevant documentary evidences. The following were the proceedings at the time of assessment/survey: - (i) As stated herein above, in the statement recorded at the time of survey (PB Pg. 33-47), the director