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.

37 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 801Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Hyderabad37Mumbai23Delhi17Chandigarh7Jaipur5Kolkata4Lucknow3Ahmedabad3Indore2Calcutta1Bangalore1Pune1

Key Topics

Section 153A46Section 143(3)34Search & Seizure32Section 8029Section 13225Addition to Income23Penalty17Disallowance16Section 139(1)

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2052/HYD/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri B. Shanti Kumar &For Respondent: Sri Solgy Kottaram CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

bogus under a separate head. The CIT(A) therefore has rightly held it to be an instance of the double addition apart from all other factual and legal aspects. We therefore find no merit in the Revenue's instant former substantive grievance in all these appeals in view of the foregoing clinching reason(s). This identical former substantive ground

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED , HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Showing 1–20 of 37 · Page 1 of 2

14
Deduction11
Section 80G8
Section 143(1)7
ITA 481/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: Disposed
ITAT Hyderabad
24 Jan 2022
AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri B. Shanti Kumar &For Respondent: Sri Solgy Kottaram CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

bogus under a separate head. The CIT(A) therefore has rightly held it to be an instance of the double addition apart from all other factual and legal aspects. We therefore find no merit in the Revenue's instant former substantive grievance in all these appeals in view of the foregoing clinching reason(s). This identical former substantive ground

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED , HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2051/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri B. Shanti Kumar &For Respondent: Sri Solgy Kottaram CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

bogus under a separate head. The CIT(A) therefore has rightly held it to be an instance of the double addition apart from all other factual and legal aspects. We therefore find no merit in the Revenue's instant former substantive grievance in all these appeals in view of the foregoing clinching reason(s). This identical former substantive ground

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

ITA 1084/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 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

801A. 5.1 The power units started claiming deduction U/s 80IA from the year of profit generation and the same is permissible u/s 80IA. The major concern raised by the AO in the remand report is that the assessee company has not submitted approval / permission / agreement with State / Central Government / Local Authority in accordance with Sub- rule 4 of Rule 18BBB

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

ITA 1083/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood(Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1083/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Industries आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1084/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hydeabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Industries Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) करदाताकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate राजस्वकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाईसमाप्तहोनेकीतिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 2

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

801A. 5.1 The power units started claiming deduction U/s 80IA from the year of profit generation and the same is permissible u/s 80IA. The major concern raised by the AO in the remand report is that the assessee company has not submitted approval / permission / agreement with State / Central Government / Local Authority in accordance with Sub- rule 4 of Rule 18BBB

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 733/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 647/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 731/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 645/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 646/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 244/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 677/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 732/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 730/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. R.K.INFRACORP PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 235/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.235/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. R.K. Infracorp Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaecr0071P (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri M V Prasad, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: | Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr (Hybrid Mode) आ.अपी. सं/Ita No.363/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. R.K. Infracorp Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaecr0071P (Appellant) Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri M V Prasad, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 25/02/2026 Pronouncement: 2

For Appellant: Shri M V Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 37(1)Section 69A

801A of the Act of Rs. 15,18,20,494/-). The assessee company had disclosed its “book profit” under section 115JB of the Act at Rs. 24,69,59,809/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny 5 ITA No.235 & 363/Hyd/2025 R.K. INFRACORP PRIVATE LIMITED T assessment and notice under section 143(2) of the Act, dated 11/06/2021 was issued

R.K.INFRACORP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 363/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.235/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. R.K. Infracorp Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaecr0071P (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri M V Prasad, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr (Hybrid Mode) आ.अपी. सं/Ita No.363/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. R.K. Infracorp Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaecr0071P (Appellant) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. (Respondent) Shri M V Prasad, Ca Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 25/02/2026 Pronouncement: 2

For Appellant: Shri M V Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 37(1)Section 69A

801A of the Act of Rs. 15,18,20,494/-). The assessee company had disclosed its “book profit” under section 115JB of the Act at Rs. 24,69,59,809/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny 5 ITA No.235 & 363/Hyd/2025 R.K. INFRACORP PRIVATE LIMITED T assessment and notice under section 143(2) of the Act, dated 11/06/2021 was issued

ASR ENGINERING & PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED), ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1133/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

purchase or supply of the material of 1.50 lakh cubic metres was made available. In this regard it is submitted that the sub contractor was examined on oath and all the information necessary was provided by him to the ADIT. The supplier stated before the ADIT that the trip sheets are available with him and the trips were noted

ASR ENGINERING & PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED), ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1135/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

purchase or supply of the material of 1.50 lakh cubic metres was made available. In this regard it is submitted that the sub contractor was examined on oath and all the information necessary was provided by him to the ADIT. The supplier stated before the ADIT that the trip sheets are available with him and the trips were noted

ASR ENGINERING & PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED), ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1136/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

purchase or supply of the material of 1.50 lakh cubic metres was made available. In this regard it is submitted that the sub contractor was examined on oath and all the information necessary was provided by him to the ADIT. The supplier stated before the ADIT that the trip sheets are available with him and the trips were noted

DY. COMMSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3)., HYDERABAD vs. SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1382/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

purchase or supply of the material of 1.50 lakh cubic metres was made available. In this regard it is submitted that the sub contractor was examined on oath and all the information necessary was provided by him to the ADIT. The supplier stated before the ADIT that the trip sheets are available with him and the trips were noted