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.

7 results for “disallowance”+ Bogus/Accommodation Entryclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai35Delhi28Hyderabad8Kolkata7Surat4Ahmedabad3Jaipur2Indore1

Key Topics

Section 6819Section 26312Section 14A10Section 1447Addition to Income6Section 2505Section 143(3)4Section 143(2)4Unexplained Cash Credit4

DIVYA SECFIN PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 538/KOL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

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

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

disallowed. Thus, made additions of Rs.78,34,800/-. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who was pleased to dismiss the same and confirmed the order of the A.O. Learned CIT(A) has disposed of the legal issue raised by the assessee by following his decision for the A.Y 2003-04 in assessee’s own case

M/S. PEARL TRACOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 495/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2023AY 2012-2013

Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(1)3
Disallowance3
Limitation/Time-bar2
Bench:
Section 143(3)Section 263

bogus/accommodation entries. 12. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us and also perused the assessment orders passed in the set aside proceedings and the decisions cited before us by both the parties. Through this appeal the assessee has raised various grounds of appeal but the sole grievance is that ld. Pr. CIT was wholly unjustified

SUBHLABH REALCON PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1226/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2023AY 2012-13
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 14ASection 250Section 68

bogus/accommodation entry in the form of share capital and security premium. Therefore, under these facts and circumstances, we find no infirmity in the finding of the ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs.11,72,00,000/- made u/s. 68 of the Act. This ground of assessee’s appeal is dismissed. 11. Ground no. 3 is with regard

M/S WELL PLAN TRADELINK (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-2(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1127/KOL/2019[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2022AY 2008-2009
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 14ASection 234BSection 263Section 68

bogus/accommodation entry in the form of share capital and security premium. Therefore, under these facts and circumstances, we find no infirmity in the finding of the ld. CIT(A) 5. AY 2008-09 Well Plan Tradelink P.Ltd confirming the addition of Rs.1,12,00,000/- made u/s. 68 of the Act. This ground of assessee’s appeal is dismissed

M/S. SEVEN HILL HARDWARE MERCHANTS (P) LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 7(3), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2079/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 68

entries in the return (ITR-6) the ld. AO found that the paid up capital of the assessee company is at Rs. 6,37,250/- and security premium is at Rs. 107,37,62,850/-. The ld. AO was not satisfied with the genuineness of share capital and share premium/security premium received by the assessee company. He accordingly completed/passed

SARANSH FURNITURE MARKETING (P) LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 7(3), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 2082/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 14ASection 250Section 68

disallowed Rs.18,343/- u/s. 14A of the I.T Act, 1961. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) challenging the impugned additions made u/s. 68 of the Act at Rs. 23,49,50,000/- and Rs. 18,343/- made u/s. 14A of the Act. Apart from filing appeal, the assessee made no further efforts before

M/S. MEGAPIX ENCLAVE PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 14(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1297/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 68

disallowed Rs. 22,670/- u/s. 14A of the I.T Act, 1961 and Rs.1,303/- u/s. 115JB. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) only challenging the impugned addition made u/s. 68 of the Act at Rs. 32,51,10,000/-. During the appellate proceedings the ld. CIT(A) issued notice of hearing twice