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.

2 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 13(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,659Delhi1,607Kolkata498Jaipur479Ahmedabad311Chennai294Bangalore246Chandigarh199Surat191Pune178Hyderabad137Indore117Karnataka116Raipur94Amritsar84Rajkot76Cochin60Nagpur57Lucknow51Visakhapatnam42Calcutta42Guwahati42Cuttack34Allahabad31Jodhpur28Agra20Patna15Telangana13Dehradun9SC6Varanasi6Ranchi5Jabalpur3Panaji3Orissa2Gauhati2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 153A4Section 683Section 1322Search & Seizure2

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR. vs. ROHIT KARAN JAIN

ITA/5/2023HC Gauhati12 Mar 2025

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153A

13. However on perusal of the Return of Income for the period under consideration, it is seen that the disclosed amount of Rs.4,23,30,000/- for the financial year 2013-14 relevant to the assessment year 2014-15 was neither incorporated in the Return nor offered for tax during period under consideration. As such, vide show cause notice

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR. vs. M/S GOLDSTONE CEMENTS LTD.

ITA/8/2022HC Gauhati
16 Dec 2024

Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

For Respondent: Dr. A. Saraf, Senior Advocate
Section 132Section 153ASection 260ASection 68

1), Kolkata. The shareholder had explained the strategic business objective behind infusion of share capital into the assessee company, for the reason that it was in the last leg of completion and commissioning of its cement plant. It is noted that the investment was made at the fair market value computed in terms of Rule 11UA of the Rules. Copy