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.

18 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 36(1)(va)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai45Ahmedabad38Delhi26Jaipur20Kolkata18Chandigarh12Hyderabad12Guwahati11Jodhpur9Raipur7Bangalore6Chennai4Indore3Surat2Lucknow2Cuttack1Pune1Allahabad1Agra1

Key Topics

Addition to Income16Section 143(3)15Section 36(1)(va)11Section 40A(3)9Disallowance9Section 687Section 2(24)(x)7Section 80G6Section 14A5Section 37

ACIT, CC-3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SNOWTEX INVESTMENT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1799/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) Asstt. Year : 2012-13 A.C.I.T, Cc-3(2), Kolkata Vs M/S. Snowtex Investment Ltd. Pan: Aaecs 0334C (Assessee/Department) (Respondent/Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Sr. Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Act. We have considered the findings of the AO and the ratio decided by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court on this issue and respectfully following the judicial ratio of the Jurisdictional High Court on this issue, we are of the view that there is no infirmity in the order passed

4
Bogus Purchases4
Deduction4

M/S. HINDISTHAN ENGINEEING & INDISTRIES LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -5 KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 952/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.952/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)

bogus since it is common knowledge that sales of goods cannot taken place without purchase of goods in the first place. So, therefore, in the light of the evidences adduced to prove the genuineness of the transactions and when the fact remains that the sales has been accepted by the Assessing Officer in totality, the action of the Assessing Officer

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTHAN ENGINEERING & INDUSTRIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1059/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.952/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)

bogus since it is common knowledge that sales of goods cannot taken place without purchase of goods in the first place. So, therefore, in the light of the evidences adduced to prove the genuineness of the transactions and when the fact remains that the sales has been accepted by the Assessing Officer in totality, the action of the Assessing Officer

ACIT, CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. M.K. SHAH EXPORTS LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appealof the Revenue (ITA No

ITA 1974/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1903/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 020. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1974/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata Vs. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 069. Kolkata – 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By :Shrisaurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit (Sr. Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2018

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: ShriSaurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80GSection 92C

bogus. We note that when the assessee made the donation to M/s. Gobind Ram Goel Charitable Trust, the said trust was enjoying the benefit of section 80G of the Act, that is, the certificate under section 80G of the Act of M/s. Gobind Ram Goel Charitable Trust was effective and in force. Therefore, the assessee is eligible for deduction

M/S. M. K. SHAH EXPORTS LTD,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appealof the Revenue (ITA No

ITA 1903/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1903/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 020. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1974/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata Vs. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 069. Kolkata – 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By :Shrisaurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit (Sr. Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2018

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: ShriSaurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80GSection 92C

bogus. We note that when the assessee made the donation to M/s. Gobind Ram Goel Charitable Trust, the said trust was enjoying the benefit of section 80G of the Act, that is, the certificate under section 80G of the Act of M/s. Gobind Ram Goel Charitable Trust was effective and in force. Therefore, the assessee is eligible for deduction

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SPML INFRA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1211/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1228/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Lata Goyal, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 263

purchases made by the appellant from M/s Padmesh Realtors Pvt. Ltd. is found to be acceptable and the consequent disallowance resulting in addition to income made for Rs. 19,39,60,866/-, is directed to be deleted." 4. The ITAT by its judgment dated 16th May, 2014 relied on the self-same reasoning and dismissed the appeal of the revenue

M/S. SPML INFRA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1228/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1228/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Lata Goyal, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 263

purchases made by the appellant from M/s Padmesh Realtors Pvt. Ltd. is found to be acceptable and the consequent disallowance resulting in addition to income made for Rs. 19,39,60,866/-, is directed to be deleted." 4. The ITAT by its judgment dated 16th May, 2014 relied on the self-same reasoning and dismissed the appeal of the revenue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WELKIN TELECOM INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1087/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav (Vice President), Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member)

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40A(3)

36(i)(va) which is effective from 1 April 2021. 6.55 It can be seen from the provisions of section 43B that the appellant is required to pay the dues before the due date of filing of return for the relevant assessment year. Relevant extract of S.43B has been reproduced here under Provided that nothing contained in this section shall

M/S. GUNNY DEALERS LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TECH-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 1373/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1373/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-13 M/S Gunny Dealers Ltd…………………....................…...……………....Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 700069. [Pan: Aabcg0019R] Vs. Ito, Tech-1, Kolkata………….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.11.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Haye Considered That The Order U/S 143(3) Was Passed By An Authority Who Lacks Jurisdiction Over The Appellant & As Such, The Said Order Is Bad In Law & Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Disallowance Of

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)

36,64,676/- made by the A.O. on account of alleged bogus creditors. 4. (a) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the disallowance of alleged bogus purchase to the extent of Rs. 84,789/- being 8% of the total purchase

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. LUCKY GOLD STAR COMPANY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1381/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

section 36(1)(va) in the case of employees contribution and overrule the judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. GSRTC which was concluded after considering the ratio judgment in the case of Alom Extrustion Ltd. iii. That the appellant craves to add, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. LUCKY GOLD STAR COMPANY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1382/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

section 36(1)(va) in the case of employees contribution and overrule the judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. GSRTC which was concluded after considering the ratio judgment in the case of Alom Extrustion Ltd. iii. That the appellant craves to add, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal

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

SHELTER INFRA PROJECTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 10(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 737/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

purchased from various parties as a bogus expense. The AO has further disallowed a sum of Rs. 3,93,941/- u/s 36(1)(va) read with Section

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MCNALLY BHARAT ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1968/KOL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2005-06 Dcit, Circle-1(1), V/S. M/S Mcnally Bharat P-7, Chowringhee Engineering Co. Ltd., 4, Square, R. No.20, 7Th Mangoe Lane, 7Th Floor, Floor, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-001 [Pan No.Abcm 9443 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri P. Mukherjee Addl Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Mrs. Trishna Sharma & ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Mr. P.K. Rai, Aca 14-08-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 31-08-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2005-06 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1,Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.07.2016, Passed In Case No.549/Cit(A)-1/Ward-1(2)/2008-09, Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing / Adding Assessee’S Claim Of Pf / Esi On Account Of Delayed Payment, Discrepancy In Various Transactions Leading To Section 69C Addition Of Unexplained Investment Pertaining To Sub-Contractor Payments, Expenditure Of Payment To Sub-Contractors Involving Corresponding Figure Of ₹20,06,017, 16,52,726/- & 46,04,963/-; Respectively, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. We Come To First Issue Of Correctness Of Section 36(1)(Va) R.W. 2(24)X_ Disallowance / Addition Of Assessee’S Employees’ Contribution Towards Pf /

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 69C

Section 36(1)(va) r.w. 2(24)x_ disallowance / addition of assessee’s employees’ contribution towards PF / ITA No.1968/Kol/2016 A.Y.2005-06 DCIT, Cir-1(1), Kol. Vs. M/s Mcnally Bharat Engineering Co. Ltd. Page 2 ESI on account of its belated payment beyond the grace period but before the due date of filing return. Suffice to say, the hon'ble jurisdictional

BALAJEE METALLIC,PCIT vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 227/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 227/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Balajee Metallic,……………………………..……Appellant 5A, Hospital Street, Chandni Chawk, Kolkata-700072 [Pan:Aamfb7518E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,…Respondent Kolkata-1, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 13, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 10, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

section 143(3) whereby he determined the taxable income of the assessee at Rs.12,82,210/-. The ld. Assessing Officer has disallowed certain expenditure out of the alleged business expenditure. The assessment order is running into three pages and, therefore, we take note of the main discussion made by the ld. Assessing Officer on pages no. 2 & 3, which reads

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. BHAWANI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., HOWRAH

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

ITA 1649/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 264Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. The said order has been challenged by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been allowed partly as the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 6,75,00,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act despite the fact that

BANDEL THERMAL POWER EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE STORES LTD.,HOOGHLY vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 23(1), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

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

ITA 717/KOL/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36Section 40A(3)

Section 36(l)(va) and subsequent confirmation by the Appellate Authority is unjustified and bad in law. 3. That an inadvertent mistake of the assessee due to non-availability of sufficient balance in their bank account and in order to get early supply should not initiate an unnecessary punitive measures which is totally unjustified and unwanted and should be deleted

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. SEMALL IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 225/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 2Section 36Section 68

36 (1)(va) of the Act in respect of employees contribution to provident fund deposited beyond the due date under the relevant Act. 2 I.T.A. No. 225/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Semall Impex Private Limited 3. After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material on record and also considering the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court