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.

1,020 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 13(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,696Delhi1,020Jaipur313Kolkata247Chennai242Ahmedabad233Bangalore181Chandigarh147Surat138Hyderabad124Indore108Raipur100Rajkot93Pune88Amritsar73Visakhapatnam62Cochin59Nagpur54Lucknow48Guwahati43Jodhpur33Allahabad33Agra29Patna26Cuttack19Ranchi14Dehradun13Jabalpur9Varanasi7Panaji3

Key Topics

Addition to Income72Section 14864Section 14757Section 143(3)53Section 6838Section 153A38Section 153C28Disallowance24Section 26323Search & Seizure

RICHMOND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4779/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2024-25
For Respondent: \nShri Gaurav Jain, Adv
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

3) to the\nfifteenth proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act that where a reference,\nunder the first proviso to sub-section (3) of section 143, has been made on or before\nthe 31st March, 2022 by the Assessing Officer for the contravention of certain\nprovisions of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act, such references

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 1,020 · Page 1 of 51

...
22
Reassessment21
Section 13219
ITA 2838/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2834/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2559/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2836/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2835/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2554/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT CENTAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2555/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2557/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2558/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2839/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2837/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 , NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2556/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the respective assessment orders, respective CIT(A) orders as well as the material placed on record. The controversy involves correctness of estimated disallowances made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged bogus purchases, violation of Section 40A(3

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI vs. PARAMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 932/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

13. Before us, the ld. DR supported the Assessment Order and the ld. AR while supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) argued that the bogus purchases have been wrongly computed by the ld. CIT(A). 14. The bogus purchases determined by the ld. CIT(A) are as under: Sl. No. as per Name of seller party PAN Purchase

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI vs. PARMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS P.LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 1330/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

13. Before us, the ld. DR supported the Assessment Order and the ld. AR while supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) argued that the bogus purchases have been wrongly computed by the ld. CIT(A). 14. The bogus purchases determined by the ld. CIT(A) are as under: Sl. No. as per Name of seller party PAN Purchase

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. PARMANAND AND SONS FOODS PRODUCTS P.LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 933/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

13. Before us, the ld. DR supported the Assessment Order and the ld. AR while supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) argued that the bogus purchases have been wrongly computed by the ld. CIT(A). 14. The bogus purchases determined by the ld. CIT(A) are as under: Sl. No. as per Name of seller party PAN Purchase

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-20 , DELHI vs. KWALITY TECHMECH PVT. LTD. , DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 937/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

13. Before us, the ld. DR supported the Assessment Order and the ld. AR while supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) argued that the bogus purchases have been wrongly computed by the ld. CIT(A). 14. The bogus purchases determined by the ld. CIT(A) are as under: Sl. No. as per Name of seller party PAN Purchase

DCIT, CC-20 , NEW DELHI vs. GLOBUS AGROFOODS PVT.LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 939/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

13. Before us, the ld. DR supported the Assessment Order and the ld. AR while supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) argued that the bogus purchases have been wrongly computed by the ld. CIT(A). 14. The bogus purchases determined by the ld. CIT(A) are as under: Sl. No. as per Name of seller party PAN Purchase

DCIT,CC-20, NEW DELHI vs. GLOBUS AGROFOODS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 940/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

13. Before us, the ld. DR supported the Assessment Order and the ld. AR while supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) argued that the bogus purchases have been wrongly computed by the ld. CIT(A). 14. The bogus purchases determined by the ld. CIT(A) are as under: Sl. No. as per Name of seller party PAN Purchase

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI vs. GLOBUS AGRO FOODS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as follows:

ITA 2419/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 711, 712 & 713/Del/2022 A.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kwality Techmech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit/Acit, B-20, Lawrence Road Cc-20, Industrial Area , Delhi Keshav Puram, North West Delhi, Delhi-110035 Pan : Aaeck1176E Appellant Respondent

Section 69B

13. Before us, the ld. DR supported the Assessment Order and the ld. AR while supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) argued that the bogus purchases have been wrongly computed by the ld. CIT(A). 14. The bogus purchases determined by the ld. CIT(A) are as under: Sl. No. as per Name of seller party PAN Purchase