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.

5 results for “reassessment”+ Bogus/Accommodation Entryclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi21Mumbai9Kolkata5Surat4Jaipur3Ahmedabad2

Key Topics

Section 1489Section 1478Reopening of Assessment5Addition to Income5Section 143(1)4Section 133A4Section 1314Section 143(3)4Short Term Capital Gains4Penny Stock4Unexplained Cash Credit4Survey u/s 133A4

ASHIKA STOCK BROKING LIMITED, KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 390/KOL/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies. The name of the assessee figures as one of the beneficiaries of these alleged bogus transactions given by the Directorate after making the necessary enquiries. In the said information, it has been inter-alia reported as under: "Entries are broadly taken for two purposes: 1. To plough back unaccounted black money for the purpose

ASHIKA STOCK BROKING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 399/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies. The name of the assessee figures as one of the beneficiaries of these alleged bogus transactions given by the Directorate after making the necessary enquiries. In the said information, it has been inter-alia reported as under: "Entries are broadly taken for two purposes: 1. To plough back unaccounted black money for the purpose

ASHIKA STOCK BROKING LIMITED, KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 400/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies. The name of the assessee figures as one of the beneficiaries of these alleged bogus transactions given by the Directorate after making the necessary enquiries. In the said information, it has been inter-alia reported as under: "Entries are broadly taken for two purposes: 1. To plough back unaccounted black money for the purpose

ASHIKA STOCK BROKING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 401/KOL/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies. The name of the assessee figures as one of the beneficiaries of these alleged bogus transactions given by the Directorate after making the necessary enquiries. In the said information, it has been inter-alia reported as under: "Entries are broadly taken for two purposes: 1. To plough back unaccounted black money for the purpose

A R UDYOG,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 46(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 1166/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Oct 2025AY 2011-2012
Section 139Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 68

entries as explained above. If\ncontention of assessee is accepted, then every addition would have to be\ndeleted if related to business deduction.Such a submission is to be rejected\noutright.[Para 31]\n■ The Commissioner (Appeals) has given a clear finding of fact that the\nassessee was involved in getting bogus bills. This finding has not been\nchallenged