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.

155 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 133Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai783Delhi422Jaipur216Kolkata155Bangalore89Surat79Ahmedabad59Chennai57Pune48Chandigarh47Indore46Hyderabad38Guwahati37Raipur28Visakhapatnam27Rajkot25Cuttack20Agra17Lucknow14Patna9Nagpur9Jodhpur7Amritsar6Allahabad5Jabalpur3Dehradun2Panaji2Cochin2Telangana2Varanasi1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 147116Section 148107Addition to Income65Section 143(3)58Section 133A54Survey u/s 133A47Section 6841Section 12A36Section 35(1)(ii)29Section 132

ALLOY STEEL EMPORIUM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-4(3), KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 286/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 286/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Alloy Steel Emporium Pvt. Ltd..................................………………………………….Appellant 10, Clive Row, 6Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Aacca 5738 N] Ito, Ward 4(3) Kolkata...................…………………………………………….....................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata – 700 069. Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri D.C. Mondal, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 29, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 20, 2018 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 17, Kolkata Dated 10.06.2016 & Grounds Raised Therein Read As Under: “1. That The Assessment Order Dated 04.03.2014 Framed U/S 147/143(3) Is Void & Nullity In The Eyes Of Law As There Are No Recorded Reasons To Belief That The Income Chargeable To Tax Escaped Assessment. 2. That Without Prejudice To Ground No 1 Stated Above, The Recorded Reasons Are Invalid & Improper & As Such, The Assessment Framed Vide Order Dated 04.03.2014 Is Bad In Law In The Eye Of Law. 3. That The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 30,66,273/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Bogus Purchase.”

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Showing 1–20 of 155 · Page 1 of 8

...
27
Disallowance20
Unexplained Cash Credit19

bogus purchases, the relevant facts are as follows: The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of trading of steel materials. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 21.11.2006 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,64,283/-. The said return was initially processed

MANGILAL JAIN ,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD - 3(3), DARJEELING , DARJEELING

Appeal is allowed

ITA 729/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2014-15 Mangilal Jain Income Tax Officer, बनाम / C/O Advocate Pradip Ward-3(3), Nr. Lal V/S. Lakhotia, 2Nd Floor, Metro Kothi, Darjeeling Plaza, Sf Road, Siliguri-734005 [Pan No.Afkpj 4178 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Dhiraj Lakhotia, A.R अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 05-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Siliguri’S Order Dated 22.03.2018 Passed In Case No.69/Cit(A)/Slg/2016-17, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities Findings Treating His Short Term Capital Loss (Stcl) Arising From Sale Of Shares After Payment Of Security Transaction Tax (Stt), Amounting To ₹1,92,320/- As Bogus Unexplained Cash Credits. The Cit(A)’S Detailed Discussion To This Effect Reads As Under:- “4. Decision :- I Have Perused The Assessment Order, The Grounds Of Appeal & The Submissions Made By The Ld.. A/R On Behalf Of The Appellant. My Observations & Findings Are As Under :- 4.1. The Present Appeal Emanates After Disallowing Rs. 11,92,320/- Arising Out Of Shares Transaction & Treated The Same As Bogus. In This Case The Assessee Purchased 32000 Shares Of Global Infratech & Finance Ltd. Through Eureka Stock & Shares Broking Services Limited @ Rs. 77.37 Per Share Aggregating To Rs. 24,79,714/- On 11.02.2014 & Further Sold The

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69

133A and recording of statement u/s 131. It has been pointed out by the A.O. that it has been admitted by a number of persons involved in running such entities of their role in arranging these share transaction. It has been revealed that the shares of Global Infratech & Finance Ltd. have been used by different share brokers for providing bogus

ACIT, CIR-40, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S LUMENS INDIA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 257/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jun 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: : Shri P.M Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 133ASection 143(2)

bogus. The statement of the said Shree Shyam Bagaria is so general in nature that does not support the view that, the appellant had not made any purchases from the three concerns.] There is no material on record to show that cross- examination of statement was allowed. In this case, all the transactions are duly recorded in the books

M/S. K.R. TRADELINK PRIVATE LIMITED. ,HOWRAH vs. NE-AC, DELHI. , DELHI.

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

ITA 927/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)

133A of the Act made the addition by disallowing entire purchases by treating the same as bogus purchases after invoking the provisions of section

M/S. ALLOY STEEL EMPORIUM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2029/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2016AY 2007-2008
For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus purchase. Other grounds were not pressed by the assessee. 4. The brief facts qua the issue are that a survey proceeding u/s 133A was conducted by the Income Tax Officer, in the business premises of the company named M/s.Vikash Iron & Steels Pvt. Ltd. During the survey proceeding it was found that M/s. Vikash Iron & Steels Pvt. Ltd, raised fake

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1729/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, DR
Section 14ASection 68Section 69C

133A of the Act, but a retracted statement even under section 132(4) of the Act would require some corroborative material for the AO to proceed to make additions on the basis of such statement. 12.2 In the case of “Basant Bansal vs. ACIT” reported in (2015)63 taxmann.com 199 (Jaipur Trib.), the assessee therein, during the search and seizure

DEPUTY COMMISSOENR OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1728/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, DR
Section 14ASection 68Section 69C

133A of the Act, but a retracted statement even under section 132(4) of the Act would require some corroborative material for the AO to proceed to make additions on the basis of such statement. 12.2 In the case of “Basant Bansal vs. ACIT” reported in (2015)63 taxmann.com 199 (Jaipur Trib.), the assessee therein, during the search and seizure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)- 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AUXINITE SUPPLIERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Auxinite Suppliers Private Tax (Cc)-3(1) Limited 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan 44/2A Jain Tower, Hazra Road, Vs. Poorva, 110 Shantipally, Kolkata- Kolkata-700019, West Bengal 700017, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecb3974H Co No. 11/Kol/2025 (Arising In Ita No. 139/Kol/2025 For A.Y. 2019-20) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Auxinite Suppliers Private Tax (Cc)-3(1) Limited 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan 44/2A Jain Tower, Hazra Road, Vs. Poorva, 110 Shantipally, Kolkata- Kolkata-700019, West Bengal 700017, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Rajeeva Kumar & Giridhar Dhelia, Ars Revenue By : Shri V. Vidhyadhar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.04.2026

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajeeva Kumar &For Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 68

bogus shareholders, the Revenue can reopen their individual assessment and addition cannot be made in the hands of the recipient company: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the assessment order as the transaction entered into by the assessee was a scheme for laundering black money into white money

JAIN INFRA PROJECTS LTD.(SINCE TAKEN OVER BANGAL CONSTRUCTION CO.),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1234/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kumar, ACA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)

bogus purchase of plant and machinery in the Financial Year 2005-06 from M/s D.K.Enterprises. so, the fixed assets came from erstwhile partnership firm and the present management was not aware of these facts as this was not in control of its affairs. As such it was argued that the false claim was initiated by the erstwhile firma

ITO, WARD 22(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. K.B. MEDICAL AGENCY, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 1210/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1209,1210&1211/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years :2010-11 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT DR
Section 147

Section 40A(3) of the Act. 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.4,30,819/- on account of bogus purchases (A.Y. 2013-14) 5. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,750/- on account of reconciled credit notes for goods returned. (A.Y. 2013-14) We note that cross objections filed

M/S. K.B. MEDICAL AGENCY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 22(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 705/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1209,1210&1211/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years :2010-11 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT DR
Section 147

Section 40A(3) of the Act. 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.4,30,819/- on account of bogus purchases (A.Y. 2013-14) 5. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,750/- on account of reconciled credit notes for goods returned. (A.Y. 2013-14) We note that cross objections filed

M/S. K.B. MEDICAL AGENCY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 22(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 706/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1209,1210&1211/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years :2010-11 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT DR
Section 147

Section 40A(3) of the Act. 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.4,30,819/- on account of bogus purchases (A.Y. 2013-14) 5. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,750/- on account of reconciled credit notes for goods returned. (A.Y. 2013-14) We note that cross objections filed

ITO, WARD 22(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. K.B. MEDICAL AGENCY, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 1211/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1209,1210&1211/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years :2010-11 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT DR
Section 147

Section 40A(3) of the Act. 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.4,30,819/- on account of bogus purchases (A.Y. 2013-14) 5. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,750/- on account of reconciled credit notes for goods returned. (A.Y. 2013-14) We note that cross objections filed

ITO, WARD 22(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. K.B. MEDICAL AGENCY, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 1209/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1209,1210&1211/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years :2010-11 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT DR
Section 147

Section 40A(3) of the Act. 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.4,30,819/- on account of bogus purchases (A.Y. 2013-14) 5. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,750/- on account of reconciled credit notes for goods returned. (A.Y. 2013-14) We note that cross objections filed

M/S. K.B. MEDICAL AGENCY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 22(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 707/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1209,1210&1211/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years :2010-11 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT DR
Section 147

Section 40A(3) of the Act. 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.4,30,819/- on account of bogus purchases (A.Y. 2013-14) 5. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,750/- on account of reconciled credit notes for goods returned. (A.Y. 2013-14) We note that cross objections filed

I.T.O.,WARD-36(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S SR ENGINEERING CORPORATION , KOLKATA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1586/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble(Kz) & S. S. Godara, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. Nos. 1455 To 1458 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2014-15 M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.................................................................................Appellant Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Vs Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..........Respondent Kolkata – 700 069. & I.T.A. Nos. 1585 & 1586 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..............Appellant Kolkata – 700 069. Vs M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.............................................................................Respondent Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 22, 2020 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act on 10.05.2016 by the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata who admitted that he was the operator of various entities to provide bogus bills to various beneficiaries in lieu of commission. As found by the Investigation Wing, the assessee was one of such beneficiaries and had received the bogus bills from the fake entities of Shri Sanjiw Kumar

S.R.ENGINEERING CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-36(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1458/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble(Kz) & S. S. Godara, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. Nos. 1455 To 1458 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2014-15 M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.................................................................................Appellant Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Vs Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..........Respondent Kolkata – 700 069. & I.T.A. Nos. 1585 & 1586 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..............Appellant Kolkata – 700 069. Vs M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.............................................................................Respondent Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 22, 2020 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act on 10.05.2016 by the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata who admitted that he was the operator of various entities to provide bogus bills to various beneficiaries in lieu of commission. As found by the Investigation Wing, the assessee was one of such beneficiaries and had received the bogus bills from the fake entities of Shri Sanjiw Kumar

I.T.O.,WARD-36(2), KOLKATA vs. S.R.ENGINEERING CORPORATION, KOLKATA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1585/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble(Kz) & S. S. Godara, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. Nos. 1455 To 1458 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2014-15 M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.................................................................................Appellant Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Vs Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..........Respondent Kolkata – 700 069. & I.T.A. Nos. 1585 & 1586 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..............Appellant Kolkata – 700 069. Vs M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.............................................................................Respondent Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 22, 2020 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act on 10.05.2016 by the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata who admitted that he was the operator of various entities to provide bogus bills to various beneficiaries in lieu of commission. As found by the Investigation Wing, the assessee was one of such beneficiaries and had received the bogus bills from the fake entities of Shri Sanjiw Kumar

S.R.ENGINEERING CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-36(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1456/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble(Kz) & S. S. Godara, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. Nos. 1455 To 1458 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2014-15 M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.................................................................................Appellant Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Vs Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..........Respondent Kolkata – 700 069. & I.T.A. Nos. 1585 & 1586 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..............Appellant Kolkata – 700 069. Vs M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.............................................................................Respondent Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 22, 2020 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act on 10.05.2016 by the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata who admitted that he was the operator of various entities to provide bogus bills to various beneficiaries in lieu of commission. As found by the Investigation Wing, the assessee was one of such beneficiaries and had received the bogus bills from the fake entities of Shri Sanjiw Kumar

S.R.ENGINEERING CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-36(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1457/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble(Kz) & S. S. Godara, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. Nos. 1455 To 1458 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2014-15 M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.................................................................................Appellant Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Vs Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..........Respondent Kolkata – 700 069. & I.T.A. Nos. 1585 & 1586 /Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Ito, Ward – 36(1), Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..............Appellant Kolkata – 700 069. Vs M/S. S.R. Engineering Corporation.............................................................................Respondent Stephen House, 6Th Floor, Room No. 101, 56E, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Absfs 6791 B] Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 22, 2020 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act on 10.05.2016 by the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata who admitted that he was the operator of various entities to provide bogus bills to various beneficiaries in lieu of commission. As found by the Investigation Wing, the assessee was one of such beneficiaries and had received the bogus bills from the fake entities of Shri Sanjiw Kumar