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.

94 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 271(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai920Delhi519Jaipur192Ahmedabad114Karnataka105Kolkata94Bangalore86Chennai71Surat68Indore66Hyderabad39Calcutta37Rajkot36Pune35Chandigarh35Raipur25Nagpur20Allahabad20Amritsar18Guwahati16Lucknow16Agra3Cuttack3Jodhpur3Visakhapatnam2Cochin2Ranchi2SC2Telangana1Patna1Panaji1Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income68Section 6849Section 14747Section 143(3)44Section 271(1)(c)39Penalty30Section 14829Unexplained Cash Credit25Section 250

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SIDHANT GUPTA, NEW DELHI

ITA 232/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchases and sales are correctly recorded and the disclosure was made just to cover the papers and documents which he may not be able to explain. The assessee bifurcated his own disclosure of Rs.3.50 lakhs in respect to two parts, i.e. Rs.70,00,000 for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.2.80 lakhs for the assessment year

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SANJAY DHINGRA, NEW DELHI

ITA 234/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchases and sales are correctly recorded and the disclosure was made just to cover the papers and documents which he may not be able to explain. The assessee bifurcated his own disclosure of Rs.3.50 lakhs in respect to two parts, i.e. Rs.70,00,000 for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.2.80 lakhs for the assessment year

Showing 1–20 of 94 · Page 1 of 5

24
Section 10(38)23
Disallowance20
Section 143(2)19

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. SHRI MURARILAL AGARWAL, KOLKATA

ITA 2293/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchases and sales are correctly recorded and the disclosure was made just to cover the papers and documents which he may not be able to explain. The assessee bifurcated his own disclosure of Rs.3.50 lakhs in respect to two parts, i.e. Rs.70,00,000 for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.2.80 lakhs for the assessment year

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. KAMALESH AGARWAL, KOLKATA

ITA 1535/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchases and sales are correctly recorded and the disclosure was made just to cover the papers and documents which he may not be able to explain. The assessee bifurcated his own disclosure of Rs.3.50 lakhs in respect to two parts, i.e. Rs.70,00,000 for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.2.80 lakhs for the assessment year

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. DILIP KUMAR MODI, KOLKATA

ITA 1485/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchases and sales are correctly recorded and the disclosure was made just to cover the papers and documents which he may not be able to explain. The assessee bifurcated his own disclosure of Rs.3.50 lakhs in respect to two parts, i.e. Rs.70,00,000 for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.2.80 lakhs for the assessment year

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

M/S GREEN STAR CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 45, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed in part

ITA 2463/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 41(1)

b) In the case of Palki Investments & Trading Co. (P) Ltd vs. ITO Mumbai 71 Taxmann.com 322, Hon'ble Bombay High Court held as under: 9 A.Y 2011-12 M/s. Green Star Corporation Section 271(1)(c), read with section 41(1), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income (False claims) - Assessment year 2005- 06 - During

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CHAND TIE-UP PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 224/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PASUPATI COMMERCE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 225/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI RAMAUTAR GROURISARIA, KOLKATA

ITA 153/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ALISSA NIRMANS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 226/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

M/S V.A.R.ALLOY & STEEL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 30/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ASHARA VINIMAY PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 214/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INDRADEV VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 223/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CALCUTTA INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CORP., KOLKATA

ITA 1610/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 132(4)Section 271A

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMBEY MINING PVT. LTD.,, KOLKATA

ITA 1607/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 132(4)Section 271A

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AKA LOGISTICS PVT. LTD.,, KOLKATA

ITA 1604/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 132(4)Section 271A

purchasing peace and assessment has been made based upon the aforesaid offerings, even if no assurance in writing is given by the searching party, it may be clearly inferred that such an inducement must have been given by the searching party. When only partial evidence or no evidence in support of concealment was detected during the search, why would

IDEAL UNEMPLOYED ENGINEERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,COOCHBIHAR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 2460/KOL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

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

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

bogus purchases. The next argument that the show cause notice u/s.274 of the Act which is in a printed form does not strike out as to whether the penalty is sought to be levied on the for “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” or “concealing particulars of such income”. On this aspect, we find that in the show cause notice u/s.274

SUVAPRASANNA BHATTACHARYA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 55, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 1303/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Nov 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07 Suvaprasanna Bhatacharya V/S. Acit, Circle-55, Bh-167, Salt Lake, Sector- 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Ii, Kolkata-700 016 Kidwai Road, [Pan No.Aedpb 2611 R] Kolkata – 700 016 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 131Section 131(1)Section 142(1)Section 271(1)Section 28

B-ward. Vijayawada vs. M/s Vijay Beer and Wines, Vijayawada. Hon'ble ITAT Hyderabad in its order dt. 10th June, 1986 in ITA No.190/H85, has considered a case of retailer of Wines and Hot Liquors supplied by M/s Phippson & Company Ltd., Calcutta and the nature of the receipt of the free air ticket given to the retailer who had fulfilled

SRI DEO KUMAR SARAF,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-49, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 199/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2015AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kr. Nag, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

purchase and added to the returned income of the assessee under the head interest received. This was also not contested by assessee in second appeal and assessment was accepted as it is. 8. Coming to third item of addition in respect to disallowance of expenses qua exempt income by invoking the provision of section 14A of the Act read with