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.

63 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 10(34)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai802Delhi486Jaipur202Chennai147Kolkata146Bangalore125Surat86Ahmedabad85Chandigarh80Indore67Rajkot65Hyderabad63Amritsar62Cochin58Raipur54Guwahati45Pune36Nagpur29Jodhpur28Visakhapatnam25Allahabad23Lucknow23Agra20Varanasi7Patna6Panaji3Cuttack3Dehradun2Jabalpur2Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 14872Section 153B72Addition to Income62Section 143(3)46Section 153A46Section 13234Section 8029Section 149(1)(b)28Search & Seizure

MEENA JEWELS AND PEARLS,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1225/HYD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2010-11
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

34 (SC) and submitted that at the time of issuing the notice u/sec.148 the Assessing Officer has to see whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case and sufficiency or correctness to the material was not a thing to be considered at this stage. The learned DR has also relied

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1084/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 63 · Page 1 of 4

27
Section 292C24
Disallowance20
Limitation/Time-bar16
ITAT Hyderabad
21 Jan 2026
AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate Represented by Department : Dr. Narendra Kumar NFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 11/11/2025
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

10,00,000 Sub Total 1,09,05,730 Total 3,72,55,730 50% of the amount being claimed as deduction was disallowed by the assessing officer because CSR expenditure by the assessee forms a part of the mandatory requirement of the Companies Act, 2013 and consequently not eligible for deduction under section 80G of the Incometax

VISHAN RAJ JAIN (HUF),HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (2), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 193/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Vishan Raj Jain (Huf) Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(2) 6-3-650, G7 6-3-650, G7, Aaykar Bhawan Maheswari Chambers Opp:L.B.Stadium Somajiguda Basheer Bagh Telangana-500 082 Hyderabad-500 004

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

bogus and thereby treating the amount of Rs.14,82,635/- as 'Income from Other Sources' as against appellant's claim of LTCG in response to notice u/s 148, which was earlier claimed as exempt u/s 10(38l and taxed the same as per provisions of Section 115BBE at 30% without giving benefit of slabs. Going into facts of the case

SREE NAGENDRA CONSTRUCTIONS,,KHAMMAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 198/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CA
Section 44ASection 68

34,283/- made by the AO\nand sustained by the CIT(A).\n\n33. So far as the decisions relied on by the ld.CIT(A) and the\nld. DR are concerned, all those decisions relate to\naddition u/s 68 of the Act where loans or advances have\nbeen obtained by the respective assessees and they could\nnot substantiate with evidence

SRINIVAS SHAH RADRARAJU ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 957/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.957/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Srinivas Shah Rudraraju Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Afcpr1979L] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/01/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 05/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2019 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)]-2, Guntur, Pertaining To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is An Individual, Filed His Return Of Income For The A.Y.2014-15 On 31.03.2015, Admitting Total Income Of Rs.53,50,976/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass For The Reason ‘Suspicious Long Term Capital Gain On Shares’ & During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer, Noticed That The 2 Srinivas Shah Rudra Raju

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 68

bogus in nature, which is taxable u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit, without carrying out further enquiries, either by furnishing relevant investigation report and statement of the persons to the assessee for his cross examination and rebuttal. Further, the Assessing Officer had also failed to carry out further enquiry to ascertain the true nature of transactions

ISHOO NARANG,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2022 & S.A. No.1/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ishoo Narang Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaupn9082B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/07/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Al The Mandatory Preconditions Before Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Were Duly Complied & Met With By The A.O.

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT (DR)
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 147Section 68

bogus in nature is devoid of any merit. The learned Page 15 of 26 ITA No 450 of 2022 and SA NO 1 of 2024 Ishoo Narang CIT (A) after considering the relevant facts has rightly sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer and their order should be upheld. 10. We have heard both the parties, perused the material

SUBHASH KUMAR KEDIA,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 707/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.707/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Subhash Kumar Kedia Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afvpk8915Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 405/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs. Shri Bikash Kumar Asstt. C. I. T. Kedia Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afapk8794E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vamshi Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Dated 31/01/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Vamshi Krishna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

bogus in nature. 14. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the ITAT Hyderabad Benches in the case of Ishoo Narang vs. DCIT in ITA No.450/Hyd/2022. The Coordinate Bench has considered an identical issue of Long-Term Capital Gain derived from trading in penny stock and after considering the relevant facts has held as under: “10. We have heard

BIKASH KUMAR KEDIA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 405/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.707/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Subhash Kumar Kedia Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afvpk8915Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 405/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs. Shri Bikash Kumar Asstt. C. I. T. Kedia Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afapk8794E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vamshi Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Dated 31/01/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Vamshi Krishna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

bogus in nature. 14. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the ITAT Hyderabad Benches in the case of Ishoo Narang vs. DCIT in ITA No.450/Hyd/2022. The Coordinate Bench has considered an identical issue of Long-Term Capital Gain derived from trading in penny stock and after considering the relevant facts has held as under: “10. We have heard

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1083/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

bogus\ninvoices to route funds.\n27.\nIt is an undisputed fact that the assessee company had recorded\nthe sales made to the aforementioned party, viz. M/s Lakshin Infradev\nPvt. Ltd in its books of account, included the same in its turnover, and\nreceived the sale consideration through banking channels. Also, it\ntranspires that the assessee company, to substantiate the subject

VISWANADH KANDULA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1085/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1084 To 1088 & 1027/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20) M/S Ace Tyres (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aadca2210N Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothese Six Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Six Separate Orders Dated 29/05/2025, 30/05/2025, 04/06/2025, 096/06/2025, 17/06/2025 & 14/07/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Arising From The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act, Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations U/S 132 Of The Act, Dated 04/01/2023 In Case Of Exel Group Of Companies Including The Assessee For The A.Ys 2014-15 To 2019-20 Respectively. Since Common Issues Are Raised In These Group Of Six Appeals Arising From Same Facts & Search & Seizure Operation, Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience, All Page 1 Of 78

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

purchase or acquisition of any asset. Therefore, the business transactions of sale of scrap or commission income etc, as well as the expenditure incurred in relation to the business activity would not constitute of an asset in terms of section 149(1)(b) of the Act. It is also a matter of fact and record that these transactions as found

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,K.V.RANGAREDDY vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

ITA 1109/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nShri M.V. Prasad, CA
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148BSection 149(1)(b)Section 151

34,90,968\n\nArivkumar\n06/01/22\n45,02,30,310\n51,66,36,659\n2,51,76,51,3151240661\n\nए. टी. वी. कमार, भारा से.\nKA TV. KUMAR. IR S.\n\n12\n\n6/1/2025\n\nAs stated earlier, these unaccounted cash transactions as recorded above contain details of\ncash generated from sale of scrap, purchase adjustments/accommodations, sale

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

ITA 1233/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: \nShri M.V. Prasad, CA
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

34,90,968\n45,02,30,310\n51,66,36,659\n2,51,76,51,3151240661\nArivkumar\n06/01/22\nए. टी. वी. कमार, भारा से.\nKA TV. KUMAR. IR S.\n12\n6/1/2025\nAs stated earlier, these unaccounted cash transactions as recorded above contain details of cash generated from sale of scrap, purchase adjustments/accommodations, sale of raw materials, sale of immovable property

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

ITA 1106/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri M.V. Prasad, CA
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

34,90,968\nArivkumar\n06/01/22\nए. टी. वी. कमार, भारा से.\nKA TV. KUMAR. IR S.\n45,02,30,310\n51,66,36,659\n2,51,76,51,3151240661\n12\nसवाल\n6/1/2025\nAs stated earlier, these unaccounted cash transactions as recorded above contain details of\ncash generated from sale of scrap, purchase adjustments/accommodations, sale of raw\nmaterials, sale of immovable

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

ITA 1108/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri M.V. Prasad, CA
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

34,90,968\n\n45,02,30,310\n51,66,36,659\n2,51,76,51,3151240661\n\nArivkumar\n06/01/22\n\nए. टी. वी. कमार, भारा से.\nKA TV. KUMAR. IR S.\n8.\n\n6/1/2025\n\nAs stated earlier, these unaccounted cash transactions as recorded above contain details of\ncash generated from sale of scrap, purchase adjustments/accommodations, sale

ACE TYRES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1085/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

section\n149(1)(b) of the Act, empowers an authority to issue\nnotice u/s 148 of the Act, if the alleged income is represented\nby any asset or expenditure. It is apparent on the face of the\nshow-cause notice( in brief "SCN"), that assessing officer is\nnot certain, as to whether in assessee`s case, the alleged\nescaped income

ACE TYRES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1086/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

section 148 of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961\nImproper many is\ncovered w/1149(1)(b).\nIsame of motive of/5148\nis ayyun.\n\nDate: 6/10/23\n\nPage 52 of 78\n\n28.\nThough there is a recommendation by the Pr. CIT,\nhowever, the sanction/approval granted by the DG reveals that it\nhas concurred with the proposal that the impugned matter\ncovered

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the above terms

ITA 156/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakhsmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

section is very clear and the appellant has incurred the expenditure and the appellant has made the payment to the various parties and persons. The appellant has, to circumvent, not accounted for the same and has also not brought out any evidence from M/s.DLF that they have accounted for such transactions in their books as cash payments. The MoU cannot

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 77/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)

purchased by the appellants after the event. 4.26 In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-Il Vs. Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540. The supreme Court has stated that the taxing authorities are not required to put on blinkers while looking at the documents produced before them. It said that the taxing authorities are entitled to look

NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 75/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)

purchased by the appellants after the event. 4.26 In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-Il Vs. Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540. The supreme Court has stated that the taxing authorities are not required to put on blinkers while looking at the documents produced before them. It said that the taxing authorities are entitled to look

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 80/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)

purchased by the appellants after the event. 4.26 In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-Il Vs. Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540. The supreme Court has stated that the taxing authorities are not required to put on blinkers while looking at the documents produced before them. It said that the taxing authorities are entitled to look