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.

28 results for “bogus purchases”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai796Delhi344Jaipur153Kolkata137Ahmedabad132Indore74Bangalore60Chennai59Cochin57Hyderabad57Chandigarh55Pune48Lucknow34Rajkot33Raipur32Guwahati28Surat26Nagpur24Ranchi17Patna17Cuttack16Amritsar11Jodhpur11Agra10Visakhapatnam9Varanasi5Dehradun2Panaji1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 10(26)24Section 153A15Section 6812Addition to Income11Section 2508Exemption5Unexplained Cash Credit5Section 271(1)(c)4Section 1474

D M JEWELLERS,GUWAHATI vs. ADDITIONAL / JOINT / DEPUTY / ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME-TAX OFFICER, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 107/GTY/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati15 Oct 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Manish Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray JCIT
Section 10(26)Section 132Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

bogus purchase as per provisions of section 68 of the Act. Page 2 of 4 ITA NO. 107 / GTY / 2025 D.M. Jewellers -Vs- The ITO, Ward-2 (1), Guwahati AY: 2014-15 Being aggrieved, the assessee filed 1st appeal before the ld. 3. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 03.02.2025 dismissed the appeal of the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

Cash Deposit4
Disallowance4
Section 2633

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. SHEETAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 64/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINOD BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 66/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. BHAGWATI DEVII BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 59/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. VISHAL BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 60/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. PRAMOD KUMAR BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 65/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINAY BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 61/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. RAVI BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 62/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. MADAN LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 63/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 51/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 52/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 53/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 54/GTY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 55/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA (HUF), DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 56/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. USHA BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 57/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. MEENAKSHI BAMALWA SONI, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 58/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as allowed by the law. He was not aware of any scheme providing bogus LTCG. There was no question of any collusion on his part with anyone in this regard. (vi) That he was not aware of any organized racket of any operators involved in the generation of bogus LTCG as alleged

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR vs. BIRI KAKUM, ESS SECTOR

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 170/GTY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: The Ld. Ao. The Ld. Ao Was Not Satisfied With The Response Given By The Assessee & Made The Impugned Addition With The Following Finding:

Section 10(26)Section 145(3)Section 250

bogus purchases on the part of the assessee and hence proceeded to verify the same. It is a matter of record that the assessee produced the books of accounts and other documents before the Ld. AO. The Ld. AO was not satisfied with the response given by the assessee and made the impugned addition with the following finding: “3.8 Considering

SMT. SANTOSH BAMALWA,DIBRUGARH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 348/GTY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumarsmt. Santosh Bamalwa Acit, Circle-1 C/O A.K. Varma, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Mahalaya Road, Dibrugarh- Milan Nagar, Dibrugarh-786003, 786001, Assam Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aedpb9900P Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing: 09/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 13/03/2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

exempt under Section 10(38) of the Act. The said shares were purchased by the assessee for ₹ 3,06,000/-. The Assessing Officer on the basis of information furnished by the assessee, came to the conclusion that the said sale of shares was nothing but accommodation entries arranged by the assessee through operators who operated in an organized manner

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

ITA 219/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 250Section 68

purchased from the beneficiary shareholders at very high prices through managed transactions thereby enabling the beneficiaries to book exempted Assessment Years: 2012-2013, 2015-16, 2012-13 Agrim Infraproject Private Limited LTCG against payment of equivalent amount in cash and managing to covert black money of the beneficiaries in the form of Long Term Capital Gain. I am further showing