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.

48 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 28clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,263Delhi1,426Kolkata440Jaipur438Chennai321Ahmedabad288Bangalore216Pune212Hyderabad167Surat160Chandigarh159Indore126Karnataka121Raipur86Amritsar80Rajkot80Nagpur59Cochin58Guwahati48Visakhapatnam41Calcutta41Lucknow40Cuttack31Agra29Allahabad29Jodhpur25Patna16Telangana14Dehradun7Varanasi7SC6Jabalpur5Panaji5Ranchi4Orissa2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 6857Section 153C33Addition to Income32Section 14831Section 25023Section 153A17Disallowance13Section 40A(3)9Section 369

RI-BHOI ISPAT & ROLLING MILLS,BYRNIHAT vs. ITO, WARD- BYRNIHAT, BYRNIHAT

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

ITA 241/GTY/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 69C

28 of the assessment order. A show cause notice was issued to the assessee and the reply filed was considered but not found acceptable. The reasons for not accepting the reply are mentioned in the assessment order, which is extracted as under: “vi) Delivery of goods not proved -The assessee was asked to furnish complete stock records in respect

RISHI AGARWAL,GUWAHATI vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

Reassessment9
Depreciation9
Section 1478
ITA 266/GTY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati24 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69C

bogus expenses in order to reduce its profit / taxable income. x. Further, it is seen that, the Assessing Officer has done all within in his power w.r.t. the proper collection and balancing the concrete evidence with the human probability aspect of the case before making an assessment, and the taxpayer has been found wanting w.r.t providing a satisfactory explanation

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 220/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

28-07-2022 by issue of notice u/s 148 is bad in law and as such assessment order based on such illegal notice is liable to be annulled. 2. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. is not justified in initiating reassessment proceeding. 3. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 221/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

28-07-2022 by issue of notice u/s 148 is bad in law and as such assessment order based on such illegal notice is liable to be annulled. 2. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. is not justified in initiating reassessment proceeding. 3. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 217/GTY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

28-07-2022 by issue of notice u/s 148 is bad in law and as such assessment order based on such illegal notice is liable to be annulled. 2. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. is not justified in initiating reassessment proceeding. 3. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 218/GTY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

28-07-2022 by issue of notice u/s 148 is bad in law and as such assessment order based on such illegal notice is liable to be annulled. 2. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. is not justified in initiating reassessment proceeding. 3. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 219/GTY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

28-07-2022 by issue of notice u/s 148 is bad in law and as such assessment order based on such illegal notice is liable to be annulled. 2. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. is not justified in initiating reassessment proceeding. 3. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 223/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

28-07-2022 by issue of notice u/s 148 is bad in law and as such assessment order based on such illegal notice is liable to be annulled. 2. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. is not justified in initiating reassessment proceeding. 3. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 222/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

28-07-2022 by issue of notice u/s 148 is bad in law and as such assessment order based on such illegal notice is liable to be annulled. 2. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. is not justified in initiating reassessment proceeding. 3. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA vs. SHRI SATYAJIT SAHA, AGARTALA

ITA 190/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68Section 69

28,58,105/- made by the Id. AO on account of alleged bogus sundry creditor on finding that the learned AO had worked out the figure of closing sundry creditor by mistakenly calculating purchase value at a lesser value by Rs 5,32.05.857/- from the details provided by Custom Stations. 5. For that the learned CIT(A) was not justified

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 114/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 118/GTY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 111/GTY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 117/GTY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 110/GTY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 116/GTY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 115/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 113/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 112/GTY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 153CSection 250Section 36Section 40A(3)Section 68

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ARIHANT INTERNATIONAL LIMITED , GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 275/GTY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 43(5)Section 73

bogus business loss, claimed to have been incurred by the assessee, from trading in Future & option. (iv) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any or all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of appeal.” 5. Ld. D/R vehemently argued supporting the order of ld. AO stating that ld. CIT(A) erred in quashing