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.

35 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 138clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai268Delhi264Chennai110Jaipur105Karnataka102Cochin57Ahmedabad46Calcutta38Kolkata35Bangalore34Chandigarh26Indore21Raipur19Visakhapatnam14Nagpur14Rajkot11Surat9Lucknow8Allahabad7Pune6Amritsar5Agra3Patna3Hyderabad3Orissa2Jabalpur1Guwahati1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)28Addition to Income24Section 14822Section 14720Section 6819Section 14A18Section 133(6)12Section 234B12Section 115J12

OM FORGING & ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE PR. CIT-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals are allowed

ITA 509/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Md.Usman, CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 263

bogus purchases and therefore the assessment order passed by him was erroneous, the assessee submitted that the provisions of section 69C are not applicable. The assessee pointed out that the source of payments for purchases were explained and the purchases were duly recorded in its books of accounts and the payments for such purchases were made from the disclosed bank

M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

Disallowance11
Unexplained Cash Credit9
Reopening of Assessment9

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1572/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

bogus bills, that the assessee had asked for cross examination of the supplier but same was not given, that the AO had not supplied the copy of the statements of Shiv Sagar to the assessee, that in the books of accounts of the assessee all the purchases and sales were recorded, that payments were made through banking channels, that

ACIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1765/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

bogus bills, that the assessee had asked for cross examination of the supplier but same was not given, that the AO had not supplied the copy of the statements of Shiv Sagar to the assessee, that in the books of accounts of the assessee all the purchases and sales were recorded, that payments were made through banking channels, that

M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1573/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

bogus bills, that the assessee had asked for cross examination of the supplier but same was not given, that the AO had not supplied the copy of the statements of Shiv Sagar to the assessee, that in the books of accounts of the assessee all the purchases and sales were recorded, that payments were made through banking channels, that

ACIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1764/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

bogus bills, that the assessee had asked for cross examination of the supplier but same was not given, that the AO had not supplied the copy of the statements of Shiv Sagar to the assessee, that in the books of accounts of the assessee all the purchases and sales were recorded, that payments were made through banking channels, that

I.T.O WD - 1(2),HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY vs. SRI KALIN DUTTA, HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal by Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1055/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2008-09

Section 143(3)

section 133(6) of the Act. However, notices to some of the parties were returned back with the remarks hereunder: Sl Name Amount involved Gist of the remarks No. of postman 1 M/s Ma Tara Enterprise Rs.9,87,036/- (purchase) Insufficient address 3 M/s Kali Enterprise Rs.2,53,949/- (purchase) Not known 4 Sri Chandi Samanta Rs.67,048/- (purchase

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1064/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rabin Chaudhury, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Section 260A. No substantial question of law is raised. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.' & CO Nos. 153 & 154/Kol/2010 Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., AY 2006-07 & 2007-08 It is pertinent to note that the decision of Bombay High Court was subjected to further appeal by the revenue before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Special Leave Petition

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1527/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rabin Chaudhury, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Section 260A. No substantial question of law is raised. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.' & CO Nos. 153 & 154/Kol/2010 Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., AY 2006-07 & 2007-08 It is pertinent to note that the decision of Bombay High Court was subjected to further appeal by the revenue before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Special Leave Petition

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KAMARHATTY COMPANY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue (in Ground No

ITA 2080/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Dr.A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2011-12

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

bogus purchases of raw materials, to the tune of Rs.25,12,469/- on account unexplained shortage in production. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter and / or modify, substitute all or any of the grounds of appeal, during the course of hearing.” 3.Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue relates to addition of ₹7,49,749/- on account

M/S AB (WINES) STORES,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOLKATA-14, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 901/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.901/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ab (Wines) Stores -Vs.- Pr. C.I.T., Kolkata-14 Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aajfa 6312 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri R.S.Biswas, Cit Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.S.Biswas, CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

bogus especially when no material to this effect had been brought on record by the ld CIT. With respect to purchases from Shree Riddhi Siddhi and N.C.Shaw & Co, it was submitted that the ld CIT had not recorded a finding to the effect that the said parties does not exist or that there was a mismatch of purchases recorded

ACIT, CIR-45, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SANJIB BOTHRA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 424/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 424/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Acit, Circle-45, Kolkata -Vs- Shri Sanjib Bothra [Pan: Adypb 2094 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri David Z. Chowngthu, Addl.CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 26.03.2013 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in deleting the disallowance of certain payments made on account of purchase

M/S IMPLEX FERRO TECH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 292/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

bogus sales made to Pahadi Steel P. Ltd. (Rs.1,91,83,840), Baykuntha Sales Corpn. (Rs.53,15,63,350) and Baba Steel Corpn. (Rs.1,78,61,569) in spite of the fact that the appellant-company being a manufacturer of ferro alloys, iron & steel products had sold various items in its normal course of business to those parties

M/S IMPLEX FERRO TECH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 293/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

bogus sales made to Pahadi Steel P. Ltd. (Rs.1,91,83,840), Baykuntha Sales Corpn. (Rs.53,15,63,350) and Baba Steel Corpn. (Rs.1,78,61,569) in spite of the fact that the appellant-company being a manufacturer of ferro alloys, iron & steel products had sold various items in its normal course of business to those parties

SRI VIVEK JHUNJHUNWALA ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 63(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2333/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 68

138/- and sold it on 13.03.2014 for Rs.1,06,560/- thus claimed short term capital loss of Rs.3,30,578/-. In order to support the aforesaid transaction and claim, the assessee had filed the contract note of purchase of M/s. SEL which is found placed at pages 4 and 5 of paper book wherein we note that the assessee

SMT. SAVITA BHURA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 12/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 68

138/- in the off market through registered broker Shree Bahubali International Ltd. and thereafter the shares purchased were deposited in the demat account. Later, on 08.09.2012 those shares were sold at Rs.62,30,2017/-. Thus, assessee received Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) of Rs.55,00,069/- which the assessee claimed to be exempt u/s. 10(38) of the Act. However

M/S. ULTRATECH NATHDWARA CEMENT LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. BINANI CEMENT LTD.,),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 152/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 154Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 801ASection 92C

bogus. I.T.A. Nos.: 1726/KOL/2014 & 152/KOL/2018 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2013-14 I.T.A. Nos.: 611/KOL/2015 & 470/KOL/2018 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2013-14 M/s. UltraTech Nathdwara Cement Ltd. (Earlier known as M/s. Binani Cement Ltd.) Now UltraTech Cement Limited. 2.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred consequently in confirming the disallowance

ACIT, CIR-14(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ULTRATECH NATHDWARA CEMENT LTD.(KNOWN AS M/S BINANI CEMENT LTD.), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 611/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 154Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 801ASection 92C

bogus. I.T.A. Nos.: 1726/KOL/2014 & 152/KOL/2018 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2013-14 I.T.A. Nos.: 611/KOL/2015 & 470/KOL/2018 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2013-14 M/s. UltraTech Nathdwara Cement Ltd. (Earlier known as M/s. Binani Cement Ltd.) Now UltraTech Cement Limited. 2.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred consequently in confirming the disallowance

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ULTRATECH NATHDWARA CEMENT LTD. (KNOWN AS M/S. BINANI CEMENT LTD.), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 470/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 154Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 801ASection 92C

bogus. I.T.A. Nos.: 1726/KOL/2014 & 152/KOL/2018 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2013-14 I.T.A. Nos.: 611/KOL/2015 & 470/KOL/2018 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2013-14 M/s. UltraTech Nathdwara Cement Ltd. (Earlier known as M/s. Binani Cement Ltd.) Now UltraTech Cement Limited. 2.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred consequently in confirming the disallowance

BINANI CEMENT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-XXVIII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1726/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2025AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 154Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 801ASection 92C

bogus. I.T.A. Nos.: 1726/KOL/2014 & 152/KOL/2018 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2013-14 I.T.A. Nos.: 611/KOL/2015 & 470/KOL/2018 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2013-14 M/s. UltraTech Nathdwara Cement Ltd. (Earlier known as M/s. Binani Cement Ltd.) Now UltraTech Cement Limited. 2.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred consequently in confirming the disallowance

SRI UDIT KUMAR DUGAR ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 799/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

138 dated 8 th April 2003 that this company was involved in the giving and taking bogus entries/ transactions during the financial year 1996-97, as per the deposition made before them by Shri Sanjay Rastogi, CA during a survey operation conducted at his office premises by the Investigation Wing. The particulars of some of the transaction of this nature