BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

23 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 40Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi121Mumbai81Chennai62Amritsar37Bangalore32Kolkata23Jaipur20Rajkot20Indore19Allahabad18Hyderabad15Ahmedabad14Surat12Jodhpur10Visakhapatnam9Guwahati9Chandigarh8Raipur7Lucknow6Agra5Pune3Nagpur3Patna2Cuttack2Dehradun2

Key Topics

Section 6828Addition to Income20Section 40A(3)15Section 14713Disallowance13Section 143(3)11Section 25011Unexplained Cash Credit8Section 143(1)

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)

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2

6
Condonation of Delay6
Section 115J4
Section 374
Section 40A(3)

40A(3) of the Act, the addition on the ground of identity of the sundry creditors also cannot be held to be justified. Moreover, the Assessing Officer has not doubted the purchase as he himself has written that there cannot be sales without purchases. In view of this, the addition on account of sundry creditors is not sustainable. This ground

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1222/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

40a(i) could be made. We note that the assessee has made remittances to 8 foreign parties which need to be examined at the level of the AO in the light of DTAAs and ascertain whether the assessee is covered under the Treaties. Needless to mention that if the AO can also find out about the examination

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1223/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

40a(i) could be made. We note that the assessee has made remittances to 8 foreign parties which need to be examined at the level of the AO in the light of DTAAs and ascertain whether the assessee is covered under the Treaties. Needless to mention that if the AO can also find out about the examination

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1166/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

40a(i) could be made. We note that the assessee has made remittances to 8 foreign parties which need to be examined at the level of the AO in the light of DTAAs and ascertain whether the assessee is covered under the Treaties. Needless to mention that if the AO can also find out about the examination

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1068/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

40a(i) could be made. We note that the assessee has made remittances to 8 foreign parties which need to be examined at the level of the AO in the light of DTAAs and ascertain whether the assessee is covered under the Treaties. Needless to mention that if the AO can also find out about the examination

M/S. DIVINE ALLOYS & POWER CO. LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1632/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 Divine Alloys & Power Co. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Block-A-139, Regent Estate, Income - Tax, Circle-3(1), Vs. 176/14/139, Rajpur Road, Kolkata. Kolkata-700092. (Pan: Aaccd 1367 Q) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

40A of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulation, 2016. 3.3. In the present case, there is no update as to whether the Resolution Plan has been approved or the liquidation order has been passed. Thus, we find that the Resolution Professional has not taken any steps or actions in respect of present litigation before the Tribunal except

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DIVINE ALLOYS & POWER CO. LIMITED , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1838/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 Divine Alloys & Power Co. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Block-A-139, Regent Estate, Income - Tax, Circle-3(1), Vs. 176/14/139, Rajpur Road, Kolkata. Kolkata-700092. (Pan: Aaccd 1367 Q) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

40A of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulation, 2016. 3.3. In the present case, there is no update as to whether the Resolution Plan has been approved or the liquidation order has been passed. Thus, we find that the Resolution Professional has not taken any steps or actions in respect of present litigation before the Tribunal except

ACIT, CIRCLE - 11(2) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SAFAL PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2515/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Saurav Bagharia & Shri Ritesh Goel, AR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

Bogus Purchase related to the earlier issue of undisclosed stock, which is related in nature. The Ld. CIT(A) should have referred this issue also to the AO for verification and furnishing Remand Report. 6. That the appellant craves to add, alter/or amend any of the grounds of appeal during the course of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AXIS OVERSEAS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2425/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc 1(1), Kolkata Axis Overseas Limited Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, 21A, Shakespeare Sarani, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700107, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca7497L Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

section 68 of the Act on the ground that the assessee failed to discharge its onus to establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in respect of the money received through cash trail. The CIT(A) in course of hearing the appeal called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer and in the said remand report the Assessing

SHARAD KUMAR SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 37(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the is partly allowed

ITA 692/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Acit, Sharad Kumar Singh Circle-3(1), Income Tax Office 10A, Norode Behari Mullick Road, 3, Government Place, Vs. Kolkata-700006, West Bengal West Bengal-700001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Alqps3842K Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kapil Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mondal, DR
Section 195Section 40Section 40A(3)

Section 195 of the Act are not applicable and accordingly, we set aside the order of ld. CIT (A) and direct the ld. AO to delete the addition. Ground no.2 is allowed. 4. The issue raised in ground no.3 is against the confirmation of addition by the ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO by disallowing

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2025/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

purchased cheques for cash or some kind of dubious transactions were made with the above-mentioned parties for the alleged bogus advances. The A.O. has merely raised his suspicion about the creditworthiness of the parties in advancing such a huge amount of fund and that to on the basis of his analysis of balance sheet and Profit & Loss

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2024/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

purchased cheques for cash or some kind of dubious transactions were made with the above-mentioned parties for the alleged bogus advances. The A.O. has merely raised his suspicion about the creditworthiness of the parties in advancing such a huge amount of fund and that to on the basis of his analysis of balance sheet and Profit & Loss

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2144/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

purchased cheques for cash or some kind of dubious transactions were made with the above-mentioned parties for the alleged bogus advances. The A.O. has merely raised his suspicion about the creditworthiness of the parties in advancing such a huge amount of fund and that to on the basis of his analysis of balance sheet and Profit & Loss

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2125/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

purchased cheques for cash or some kind of dubious transactions were made with the above-mentioned parties for the alleged bogus advances. The A.O. has merely raised his suspicion about the creditworthiness of the parties in advancing such a huge amount of fund and that to on the basis of his analysis of balance sheet and Profit & Loss

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)

40A(2)(b) are not applicable only. 6.29 Therefore, the addition made by the learned AO for sum of RS.25,70,639/- is not correct and is deleted. 6.30 Accordingly, the ground 9 of the appellant are allowed. Ground 10 6.31 Ground 10 relates to disallowances of interest paid on delayed payments of statutory dues. The learned Assessing Officer

ENERGY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 343/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mahare Yogesh Prabhakar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)Section 40A(3)

bogus purchase amount of ₹44,31,575/-, ₹21,40,740/- disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, ₹7,804/- the disallowance of business expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Act and ₹56,400/- disallowance for contravening Section 40A

PANKAJ MUKHERJEE,DURGAPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1, , DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2294/KOL/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Dcit, Circle-1, Pankaj Mukherjee Aaykar Bhavan, Aykar Bithi, 1/9 Debinagar, Beniachity, City Centre, Durgapur, Vs. Kolkata-713213, West Bengal West Bengal 713216 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajopm7641Q Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 40A(3)Section 68

section 147 of the Act dated 30.12.2017. Pertinent to state that the only addition made in in the assessment order which was subject matter of the reasons recorded was in respect of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act of ₹16,98,126/-, for which the ld. AO has noted in the reasons recorded that the assessee has deposited

M/S. DELIGHTED HOLDINGS (P) LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIR, CIR-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 624/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

section 143(3)of the Act, pertaining to Assessment Year 2003-04 lying at pages 45-46 of the ledger book, in ledger account showing purchase of shares qua the Assessment Year 2003-04 lying at page 34 which have never been disputed by the A.O., it is abundantly clear that the assessee had purchased the shares in Assessment Year

ITO, WARD-1(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S GEMINI COMMERCE, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 14/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 14/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Ward - 11(1), M/S. Gemini Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Vs 8A, Brown Field Row Kolkata - 700027 [Pan : Aadcg0842J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/02/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is The Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 21/09/2022 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of Six (6) Days In Filing Of This Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons Of Delay. After Perusing The Same, We Find That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. Hence, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted. 3. The Revenue Has Filed The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5,61,00,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Sale Of Unquoted Shares In The Course Of

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

section 143(3)of the Act, pertaining to Assessment Year 2003-04 lying at pages 45-46 of the ledger book, in ledger account showing purchase of shares qua the Assessment Year 2003-04 lying at page 34 which have never been disputed by the A.O., it is abundantly clear that the assessee had purchased the shares in Assessment Year

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