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.

6 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 2(15)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,601Delhi983Jaipur317Kolkata254Chennai237Ahmedabad234Bangalore177Chandigarh148Surat130Hyderabad126Indore101Raipur94Rajkot91Pune79Amritsar72Cochin58Guwahati57Visakhapatnam54Lucknow46Nagpur44Allahabad30Agra29Jodhpur27Patna24Cuttack17Dehradun7Varanasi7Jabalpur6Ranchi5Panaji3

Key Topics

Section 2639Addition to Income6Section 143(3)4Section 153A4Section 1274Cash Deposit4Unexplained Cash Credit3Section 682Section 147

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-SATNA, SATNA vs. M/S. RAM KUMAR SURESH KUMAR, SATNA

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

ITA 136/JAB/2018[2013-14]Status: PendingITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gaaleasst. Commissioner Of Vs Shri Ram Kumar Income Tax, Circle-Satna, Suresh Kumar, Satna Birla Road, Satna (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaffr3899D Revenue By Shri Shravan Kumar Gotru, Cit Dr Assessee By Shri Rahul Bardia, Fca Date Of Hearing 13/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2023 O R D E R Per Om Prakash Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 12.03.2018 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Jabalpur [In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] For The Assessment Year 2013-14, Raising Following Grounds:

Section 133(6)Section 68

2 | P a g e ACIT vs Shri Ram Kumar Suresh Kumar denied of having made any transactions with the assessee or having any credit balance with the assessee. This fact of the denial made in writing by the said party was confronted to the assessee. But the assessee contended that it had made purchases from said party through

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-CHHINDWARA, CHHINDWARA vs. SHRI SHEVENDRA SINGH PARIHAR, BALAGHAT

2
Section 127(2)2
Section 1322
Bogus Purchases2

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 91/JAB/2019[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus purchase expenses. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.84,65,420/- on account of difference in gross receipts. 3. Learned CIT(A) erred in de4leting the addition of Rs.82,23,678/- on account of unexplained cash deposits. Grounds of Cross Objection No.01/JAB/2020 “1. Considering the fact that in spite of repeated request

M/S AMBAJEE JEWELLERS JABALPUR,JABALPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JABALPUR-1,, JABALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 21/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Nikhil Choudhary

For Respondent: Shri Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 68

15,87,426/-, against a declared purchase of Rs.10,08,35,106/- in the trading account. The assessee had not produced any purchase bills in respect of purchases allegedly made from sister concerns, namely, M/s Ambaji Diamonds, Jabalpur and M/s. Ambaji Hall Mark Gold, Jabalpur. The PCIT also noted the observation in the assessment order that no details

SHRI GAURAV AGRAWAL,JABALPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JABALPUR

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

ITA 37/JAB/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Garima Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 127(2)Section 132Section 153A

2,58,60,033/- made on account of unexplained transactions/ unaccounted money and Rs. 104,19,713/- on account of undisclosed income/ unexplained transaction. The ld. CIT(A) has also confirmed an amount of Rs. Rs.12,96,390 on account of unexplained cash and Rs. 4,00,000 on account of unexplained money. 7. Aggrieved, with the order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JABALPUR vs. SHRI GAURAV AGRAWAL, JABALPUR

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

ITA 39/JAB/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Garima Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 127(2)Section 132Section 153A

2,58,60,033/- made on account of unexplained transactions/ unaccounted money and Rs. 104,19,713/- on account of undisclosed income/ unexplained transaction. The ld. CIT(A) has also confirmed an amount of Rs. Rs.12,96,390 on account of unexplained cash and Rs. 4,00,000 on account of unexplained money. 7. Aggrieved, with the order

SHRI SUBHASH KUMAR AAHI,SATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-SATNA, SATNA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 24/JAB/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur12 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Nikhil Choudhary

For Respondent: Shri N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR 1
Section 143(3)Section 250

2. Construction of DASSA had been made prior to purchase of shop and was evident from the registry. 3. Costs of shop, locker and stair on first floor had already been built up as evident from the registry. 4. Cost of shop w/c and stairs of second floor had been built up as evident from registry