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.

88 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 149clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi439Mumbai430Jaipur174Bangalore101Karnataka99Chennai97Kolkata88Chandigarh74Cochin58Amritsar44Ahmedabad41Calcutta36Raipur28Pune28Rajkot26Guwahati26Hyderabad26Surat24Nagpur15Indore13Agra12Lucknow11Visakhapatnam8Jodhpur8Patna5Cuttack4Ranchi2SC2Gauhati1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 147126Section 148123Addition to Income74Section 143(3)63Section 153A39Section 115J38Section 6829Section 13228Disallowance27

NEZONE TUBES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 180/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

149(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ITA Nos.: 179 & 180/KOL/2025 AYs: 2011-12 & 2015-16 Nezone Tubes Limited. 7. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by failing to adjudicate the 7 ground that the Learned Assessing Officer passed the order without considering the submissions filed by the appellant

Showing 1–20 of 88 · Page 1 of 5

Section 26325
Unexplained Cash Credit18
Reassessment17

NEZONE TUBES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 179/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

149(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ITA Nos.: 179 & 180/KOL/2025 AYs: 2011-12 & 2015-16 Nezone Tubes Limited. 7. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by failing to adjudicate the 7 ground that the Learned Assessing Officer passed the order without considering the submissions filed by the appellant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ALEMBIC MERCHANTS PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue fails

ITA 1826/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Central Cir-1(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Alembic Merchants Pvt. Ltd Pan: Aacca 0918Q Appellant Respondent

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)Section 68

149 of the Act, the AO gets the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment of the assessee for AY 2009-10. Further, it can be noted that section 153 of the Act, prescribes the “Time Limit for completion of assessment, re-assessment and re-computation”. Therefore, in the case of re- opening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act, the time

URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1946/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

bogus purchases. 2.4 Aggrieved with the assessment order the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) where he could get partial relief. Further aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A) both the assessee and Revenue have filed the appeals before this Tribunal. 3. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined

PRAMOD LAKRA DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD, KOLKATA

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

ITA 222/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

bogus purchases. 2.4 Aggrieved with the assessment order the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) where he could get partial relief. Further aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A) both the assessee and Revenue have filed the appeals before this Tribunal. 3. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S STANDARD LEATHER PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2620/KOL/2013[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2010-11

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

bogus warranting addition in the income of the assessee. It is again submitted that there is no dispute that the goods have been purchased and the genuinity of the purchase have not been disputed and it was because that the provisions of section 40A(3) have been applied. Moreover, the assessee maintained day-to-day stock register wherein

ACIT, CIRCLLE-34, KOLKATA vs. SUBHAS KUMAR KEDIA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1677/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1677/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Acit, Circle-34, Kolkata Vs Subhas Kumar Kedia, 41, N.S.Road, Kolkata Pan No. :Afnpk 9669 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Shreya Loyalka, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 05.06.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- I) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order U/S.148A(D) & All Subsequent Proceedings. Ii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Failed To Acknowledge The Fact That The Assesse Had Not Expressed Any Grievance Against The Validity Of Order U/S 148A(D) By Moving Any Writ Petition Which Should Have Been Done In Case Of Any Grievance After Getting The Sald Order U/S.148A(D). Iii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order When The Ld. Cit(A) Has No Jurisdiction To Deal With The Question Whether The 148A(D) Order Was Passed Validly Or Properly As An Order U/S.148A(D) Is Not An Appealable Order Before Ld. Cit(A) As Per Section 246A.

For Appellant: Ms. Shreya Loyalka, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 246ASection 3Section 69A

149(1)(a) of the Act would apply. 10. As indicated above, the specified authority changes depending on the time Simit prescribed in Section 151 of the Act. It is on this account that there is linkage between ruling rendered in Ganesh Dass Khanna's case (supra) and the instant matters 11. It may also be noted that in Ganesh

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

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

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

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

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

149 (Mad) Janak S Rangwalla vs ACIT reported in 11 SOT 627 (Mum) CIT vs Gopal Purohit reported in 228 CTR 582 (Bom) CIT vs Merlin Holding (P) Ltd reported in 375 ITR 118 (Cal) ITO vs Manimaya Holdings Pvt Ltd in ITA No. 439/Kol/2009 for Asst Year 2005-06 dated 6.4.2016 (Kolkata Tribunal) 5.8. We have heard the rival

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

149 (Mad) Janak S Rangwalla vs ACIT reported in 11 SOT 627 (Mum) CIT vs Gopal Purohit reported in 228 CTR 582 (Bom) CIT vs Merlin Holding (P) Ltd reported in 375 ITR 118 (Cal) ITO vs Manimaya Holdings Pvt Ltd in ITA No. 439/Kol/2009 for Asst Year 2005-06 dated 6.4.2016 (Kolkata Tribunal) 5.8. We have heard the rival

RAM ENGINEERING CONCERN,HOWRA vs. ITO, WARD-48(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 477/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-

Section 143(3)Section 148

section 143(3)/147 of the Act and rejecting the same, he upheld the validity of the said assessment. As regards the addition of Rs.40,44,480/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of the alleged bogus purchases, the ld. CIT(Appeals) held that the entire amount of bogus purchases could not be treated as income of the assessee

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

VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. ADDL C.I.T RG - 10,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue stands dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1326/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

section 68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. 10. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before ld CIT(A) who confirmed the order of the AO by observing as under:- “4. I have considered the finding of the AO in his assessment order dt. 27.12.2010 and the written submission filed by the AR during

I.T.O WD - 10(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue stands dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 2101/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

section 68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. 10. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before ld CIT(A) who confirmed the order of the AO by observing as under:- “4. I have considered the finding of the AO in his assessment order dt. 27.12.2010 and the written submission filed by the AR during

SHRI JYOTI MOHAN MALL,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOL - XV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 819/KOL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narsimha Charyassessment Year:2003-04

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

purchase and sale of shares was not matching with the transaction of the stock exchange therefore, the impugned loss was bogus. The learned DR vehemently supported the order of learned CIT u/s 263 of the Act. In the rejoinder, the ld AR submitted that the events which have taken place subsequent to the assessment proceedings cannot be the basis

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S G.K.ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross objection of the different assessees are also dismissed

ITA 2408/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar] "ी संजय गग" "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम"

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

149(1)(b) of the Act, it is imperative that the Assessing Officer, in his reasons should also state that the escaped income is likely to be Rs. 1 lac or more, which is an essential ingredient for seeking the approved and satisfaction that is to be recorded by the Competent Authority under the Act. Consequently, before taking any action

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. GAURAV ROSE REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross objection of the different assessees are also dismissed

ITA 2407/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar] "ी संजय गग" "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम"

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

149(1)(b) of the Act, it is imperative that the Assessing Officer, in his reasons should also state that the escaped income is likely to be Rs. 1 lac or more, which is an essential ingredient for seeking the approved and satisfaction that is to be recorded by the Competent Authority under the Act. Consequently, before taking any action

AMIR INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-34(2), KOLKATA

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

ITA 298/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

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

Section 147 of the Act vide assessment order dated 17.12.2019 whereby he made an addition of Rs. 6,05,426/- on the ground that the going through the accounts it is nowhere found the entry of bogus bill of Rs. 6,05,426/-. It is alleged by the assessing authority that he had some information that one Sh. Manoj

M/S. BNA COMMERCE PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148

purchase, unsecured loans and bogus billing in lieu of\ncommission. He facilitated the meeting of parties who need bogus bills and parties who\nprovided the entry of bogus bills without involving himself or his dummies in the process\nin lieu of commission. M/s BNA Commerce Pvt. Ltd. PAN-AABCB0727D is one of the\nbeneficiary received Rs.1,05,00,000/- from