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.

123 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 13(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,616Delhi1,737Kolkata538Jaipur519Ahmedabad338Chennai337Bangalore296Chandigarh223Surat221Pune203Hyderabad193Indore129Karnataka123Raipur97Amritsar79Rajkot77Nagpur71Visakhapatnam63Lucknow61Cochin60Guwahati43Cuttack43Calcutta43Allahabad34Jodhpur28Agra27Patna15Telangana13Ranchi13Dehradun9Jabalpur7Varanasi7SC6Panaji4Orissa2Gauhati2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 26035Section 14819Section 12A12Addition to Income10Revision u/s 2637Survey u/s 133A7Section 139(1)5Section 1535Section 54E

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KRUPANIDHI EDUCATIONAL TRUST

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA/47/2013HC Karnataka22 Oct 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 12ASection 13Section 260

purchased a BMW car - 6 - (iv) the Assessee was availing loans in cash from Sindhi financiers and was repaying in cash; (v) the assessee was not maintaining accounts on a regular basis; the assessee was migrating from a particular software to another software; (vi) the assessee violated 13 (1) (c) of the Act; and (vii) the original trust deed dated

S N SIMHA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result there is no merit in this writ petition and the

WP/24840/2012HC Karnataka

Showing 1–20 of 123 · Page 1 of 7

5
Section 22A5
Section 1475
Exemption3
04 Oct 2012

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy Writ Petition No. 24840 Of 2012 (La-Kiadb) Between: 1. S.N.Simha, Aged About 73 Years, Son Of Late G.R.Swamy, 2. S.N.Yamuna Devi, Wife Of Sri. S.N.Simha, Aged About 66 Years, Both Are Proprietors M/S. Viswabandhu Press & Sree Bharathi Cottage Industries Company, No.16, 1St Cross, Cottonpet, Bangalore – 560 053. …Petitioners (By Shri. S.P.Shankar, Senior Advocate For Shri. K.L.Sreenivas, Advocate For M/S. K.N.L. Associates) And: 1. The State Of Karnataka, Represented By Its Secretary, Commerce & Industries

Section 28(4)Section 3

Section 28(1) of the KIADB Act in declaring an area as an industrial area, notwithstanding that it is shown as a residential area in the Comprehensive Development Plan. He would contend that there is a subtle distinction insofar as the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Hereinafter referred to as ' the LA Act' for brevity

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BPL SANYO FINANCE LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA/652/2006HC Karnataka11 Sept 2013

Bench: The Tribunal Was Arising From The Order Dated 4Th June 2004 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Bangalore (For Short “The

Section 115JSection 133Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

B BHOSALE, J) This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) is directed against the order dated 28th October 2005 rendered by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench “A” (for short “Tribunal”) in ITA 2171/Bng/2004, whereby, the appeal filed by the respondent has been partly allowed. 2. The appeal before the Tribunal

CONVERGYTICS SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/6811/2022HC Karnataka30 Sept 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

Section 482

b. Monthly Rent payment: INR 1.75 Lakhs c. Monthly Oversees compensation (Canada): INR 10 Lakhs d. Monthly Operations (Internet/ Communication/ Hardware/ Petty expenses): INR 5 Lakhs e. Company Doctor for Employee Health and COVID care package: INR 1 Lakh per 9 month (INR 12 Lakhs total payable for the year upfront) f. Overseas sales development compensation (Taiwan) – INR 10 Lakhs

G RAMACHAR vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/18939/2009HC Karnataka18 Mar 2016

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),B.V.NAGARATHNA

Section 22A

b) declaring what language shall be deemed to be commonly used in each district; (c) declaring what territorial divisions shall be recognized under section 21; (d) regulating the amount of fines imposed under sections 25 and 34, respectively; (e) regulating the exercise of the discretion reposed in the registering officer by section 63; (f) regulating the form in which registering

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. M/S. K.R.S. ENTERPRISES PVT

ITA/253/2015HC Karnataka21 Sept 2015

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad

Section 115

13 As declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhagat Ram vs. Teja Singh and the later decision referred to supra. 31 26. The definite and uniform scheme of succession under section 15 of the HS Act is that the heirs of a Hindu woman who dies intestate are grouped into five categories as described in entries

SMT BASAVVA W/O RUDRAYYA NEELANNAVAR vs. SMT TANGEVVA W/O KALLAPPA KENCHANNAVAR

WP/31641/2008HC Karnataka14 Aug 2013

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar Writ Petition No.31641/2008 (Lr) Between: 1. Smt Basavva W/O Rudrappa Neelannavar @ Byahatti, Age: 55 Years, R/O Unakal, Tq. & Dist: Hubli. 2. Iravva D/O Rudrappa Neelannavar, Age: 33 Years, R/O Amminabhavi, Tq. & Dist: Dharwad. ... Petitioners (By Sri.A.P.Murari For Sri. Anandkumar A Magadum, Adv.) And: 1. Smt Tangevva W/O Kallappa Kenchannavar Deceased By Lrs R.2 & R.5 (Amended As Per Court Order Dated: 12.11.2010) 2. Neelavva W/O Gadigeppa Mensikayi Age Major, R/O Unakal, Tq. Hubli, Dist: Dharwad. R

Section 45Section 77A

13 : the tenant finding recorded as such by 11th respondent would not be binding on the applicant and as such he contends Appellate Tribunal has rightly discarded said report and this fact has been rightly taken note of by the Appellate Tribunal and it does not call for interference. He would submit a stray entry in RTC extract would

M/S ANS CONSTRUCTIONS LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL

WP/32896/2016HC Karnataka06 Dec 2019

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

Section 10(3)Section 35

13. Section 38 deals with the assessment of tax. In terms of the said provision, every dealer shall be deemed to have been assessed to tax based on the return filed by him under Section 35, except in cases where the Commissioner may notify the dealer of any requirement of production of accounts before the prescribed authority in support

COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE

ITA/312/2016HC Karnataka17 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260

B’, at Bangalore, in ITA Nos. 1075 and 1076/Bang/2014 for Assessment Year 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 before the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle 17(2) Bangalore in Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Bangalore vs. Ohio University Christ College, Academy for Management Education, Bangalore. 2. The respondent – assessee is a registered public Charitable Trust under

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS

Appeal is dismissed with costs

ITA/70/2007HC Karnataka26 Sept 2012

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice N.K.Sudhindrarao R.S.A.No.70/2007

Section 100

b) of Land Reforms Act? 3. Can there be a declaration that the sale deed with respect to property which has vested in the Government by virtue of Act 19 of 1996 valid? 4. Can there e a declaration when no consequential relief is prayed for in the light of Section 344 of Specific Relief Act? 37. In addition

M/S KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed and the impugned

ITA/11/2021HC Karnataka05 Feb 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 36(1)Section 39(1)Section 66(1)Section 70

1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, will apply equally to the powers under Section 64 of the KVAT Act - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52370-DB STA No. 11 of 2021 8.2 A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the State of Karnataka Vs. Sri. Rajesh Jain2, has opined that once the purchasing dealer satisfactorily demonstrates that

BORALINGAIAH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/33339/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA

RAMA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/27625/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA

S B JAGADEESH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/51160/2017HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA

SRI SANJAY JAYARAM vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/15270/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA

SRI. GURUPRASAD vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

WP/8176/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA

P. D. PONNAPPA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/12975/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA

MR C V MANJUNATHA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/235/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA

RAJAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/50955/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA

SRI SANTOSH A SHETTY vs. THE STATE OF KARANTAKA

WP/29668/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR ALIAS BADIGERE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O PURADAKERE HEREKERUR TALUK HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS 121 (BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI SWAMIGALU, KUDLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA