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.

9 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 270A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai37Jaipur35Rajkot18Guwahati16Ahmedabad12Delhi9Surat8Nagpur7Hyderabad6Indore3Chennai3Pune3Lucknow2Chandigarh2Jodhpur1Patna1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 153C8Section 687Addition to Income7Section 270A6Section 143(3)5Penalty4Natural Justice4Section 115B3Section 234A3Section 133(6)

M/S LS CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly

ITA 2208/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2207 & 2208/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम M/S Ls Contractors Dcit, Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-30, H-12, Tropical Building, E-2, Ground Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Ara Centre, Pan No.Aabcl8541R Jhandewalan Extension Karol Bagh, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153CSection 234ASection 270A

9. That the CIT(A) on facts and in law erred in not deleting the interest levied by the respondent u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act and further erred in not deleting the penalty levied by the respondent u/s 270A of the Act.” 2. Thereafter the assessee has also filed additional grounds of appeal challenging the assumption

M/S LS CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, DELHI, DELHI

2
Section 143(2)2

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly

ITA 2207/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2207 & 2208/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम M/S Ls Contractors Dcit, Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-30, H-12, Tropical Building, E-2, Ground Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Ara Centre, Pan No.Aabcl8541R Jhandewalan Extension Karol Bagh, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153CSection 234ASection 270A

9. That the CIT(A) on facts and in law erred in not deleting the interest levied by the respondent u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act and further erred in not deleting the penalty levied by the respondent u/s 270A of the Act.” 2. Thereafter the assessee has also filed additional grounds of appeal challenging the assumption

DEEPAK GOLCHA,DELHI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-43(1), DELHI

Appeal is allowed in very terms

ITA 4071/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhasstt. Yr: 2022-23

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 270ASection 270A(9)Section 274

purchases amounting to Rs. 12,28,95,996/- from alleged bogus parties. Penalty proceedings were initiated under Section 270A read with Section 274 for under-reporting consequent upon misreporting of income. A show-cause notice dated 11.03.2024 was issued, fixing the date of compliance on 30.03.2024. The assessee, as recorded in the assessment order, agreed to the addition

BHARAT AGRO INDUSTRIES,BHIWANI vs. DCIT CIRCLE, BHIWANI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3934/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi23 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Bharat Agro Industries, Vs Dcit, Devsar Mod, Opp. Delhi Police Circle Bhiwani. School, Loharu Road, Bhiwani, Haryana-127021. Pan-Aamfb0628H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Gautam Jain, Adv., Shri Lalit Mohan, Adv. & Shri Parth Singhal, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23.02.2024

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

270A of the Act. As the penalty is merely initiated and not levied, this ground is pre- mature. Hence, ground No.2 is dismissed.” 9. From the above, it is clear that the Ld.CIT(A) did not advert to submission that no error was found in the stock of the assessee. Once the assessee has recorded the sales in its books

DCIT, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BRIVAN CONSULTANTS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3672/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwlbrivan Consultants Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-31 Limited, B 34, Lgf, Ncc Dts (S) Panchsheel Enclave, South Jhandwala Ext., Delhi, Delhi- 110017 New Delhi – 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcb3684F Appellant .. Respondent Dcit, Central Circle-4(2) Vs. Brivan Consultants Private Room No. 384, Cr Limited, B 34, Lgf, Building, Ip Estate Panchsheel Enclave, South Delhi – 110002 Delhi, Delhi- 110017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcb3684F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Pulkit Saini, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

9. Concerted Scheme: Thus, from the above facts and after taking into consideration all the factors into consideration a picture of a well crafted scheme for booking bogus expenditure and evading taxes is revealed. It is to be note that out of 77 brokers, 22 are Hindu Undivided family (HUFs) and remaining are mostly related to each other

BRIVAN CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3616/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwlbrivan Consultants Private Vs. Acit, Central Circle-31 Limited, B 34, Lgf, Ncc Dts (S) Panchsheel Enclave, South Jhandwala Ext., Delhi, Delhi- 110017 New Delhi – 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcb3684F Appellant .. Respondent Dcit, Central Circle-4(2) Vs. Brivan Consultants Private Room No. 384, Cr Limited, B 34, Lgf, Building, Ip Estate Panchsheel Enclave, South Delhi – 110002 Delhi, Delhi- 110017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcb3684F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Pulkit Saini, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

9. Concerted Scheme: Thus, from the above facts and after taking into consideration all the factors into consideration a picture of a well crafted scheme for booking bogus expenditure and evading taxes is revealed. It is to be note that out of 77 brokers, 22 are Hindu Undivided family (HUFs) and remaining are mostly related to each other

MUKUL HASTEER,KARNAL vs. ITO WARD-1, KARNAL

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 96/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 234A

9. That the Ld. Appellate Authority wrongly & illegally upheld the addition ofRs63,790/- against the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. That the Ld. Appellate Authority wrongly & illegally upheld the addition of Rs.1,6 I ,400/- against the facts and circumstances of the case. That the Ld. Appellate Authority wrongly & illegally upheld the invoking of section I I5BBE against

VIKAS CHAWLA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 5625/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2022-23 Vikas Chawla, Vs Income Tax Officer, 582/2, 1St Floor, Gali Ward-47(1), D.S. Building, Ghanteshwar Katra Neel New Delhi-110001 Chandni Chowk, New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afnpc7260A

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 68

270A despite full disclosure by the assessee, contrary to the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Courts that mere disallowance of a bona fide claim cannot attract penalty. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is running a firm in the name and style of M/s Shilpa Impex, which is dealing in wholesale and retail trading

SINGAL AND SONS CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 4 , HISAR

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 264/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansingal & Sons Construction Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 4, Behind Sbi Main Branch, Hisar. Delhi Road, Hisar – 125 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aaccs0362C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2025 Date Of Order : 10.07.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)) Dated 06.11.2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Income Of Rs.5,90,940/- On 29.10.2017 For The Ay 2017-18. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Through Cass. Accordingly, Notices

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 41(1)Section 43B

270A of the Act. The submission of the appellant on various grounds of appeal is as under: - 1. Ground no 1 to 4 During the year under consideration, the appellant was in engaged in business of Civil construction of dwelling units or other civil construction. The assessing officer has made an addition of Rs. 34,44,803/- on account