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.

2,844 results for “bogus purchases”+ Addition to Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,844Delhi1,509Kolkata462Ahmedabad402Jaipur379Chennai320Chandigarh218Bangalore201Surat192Hyderabad148Raipur148Pune144Indore132Rajkot122Amritsar87Nagpur76Lucknow70Guwahati69Visakhapatnam67Cochin63Agra50Jodhpur43Patna43Allahabad33Ranchi30Cuttack29Dehradun21Jabalpur12Varanasi8Panaji4

Key Topics

Addition to Income87Section 14880Section 14772Section 143(3)61Section 6851Section 153C43Section 271(1)(c)41Bogus Purchases37Section 25031Section 69C

INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SATGURU GEMS, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the R

ITA 4644/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. K A Viadyalingan

addition made by the Assessing Assessing Assessing Office Office Office on on on account account account of of of bogus bogus bogus purchases purchases purchases of of of Rs.2,01,67,404/ Rs.2,01,67,404/-without appreciating the fact that in the case without appreciating the fact that in the case Swetamber Steels Ltd. (Supra), the Hon'ble ITAT

INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SATGURU GEMS, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the R

ITA 4613/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai

Showing 1–20 of 2,844 · Page 1 of 143

...
31
Disallowance31
Reopening of Assessment29
30 Aug 2024
AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. K A Viadyalingan

addition made by the Assessing Assessing Assessing Office Office Office on on on account account account of of of bogus bogus bogus purchases purchases purchases of of of Rs.2,01,67,404/ Rs.2,01,67,404/-without appreciating the fact that in the case without appreciating the fact that in the case Swetamber Steels Ltd. (Supra), the Hon'ble ITAT

ITO41(2)(3),MUMBAI, BKC, MUMBAI vs. NIRMIT JATIN LATHIA, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue

ITA 4828/MUM/2023[2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Ito 29(2)(2), 2B/101, Jain Upashraya Lane, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Tagore Nagar, Vikhroli East, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito 41(2)(3), Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Room No. 732, Om Sai Chs, Bldg. No. 2, B-Wing, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Flat No. 101, Opp Bharat Nagar Mumbai-400051. Jain Upashraya Lane, Vikhroli (E), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil Shinde, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Mandar Vaidya
Section 1Section 129Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

bogus purchases of Rs.2,75,25,669/ purchases of Rs.2,75,25,669/- observing as under: Nirmit Jatin Lathia ITA Nos. 4784, 4828/MUM/2023 “ 6. Decision 6.1 This appeal has been filed by the appellant to this office that the This appeal has been filed by the appellant to this office that the This appeal has been filed by the appellant

NIRMIT JATIN LATHIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 29(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue

ITA 4784/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Ito 29(2)(2), 2B/101, Jain Upashraya Lane, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Tagore Nagar, Vikhroli East, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito 41(2)(3), Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Room No. 732, Om Sai Chs, Bldg. No. 2, B-Wing, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Flat No. 101, Opp Bharat Nagar Mumbai-400051. Jain Upashraya Lane, Vikhroli (E), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil Shinde, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Mandar Vaidya
Section 1Section 129Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

bogus purchases of Rs.2,75,25,669/ purchases of Rs.2,75,25,669/- observing as under: Nirmit Jatin Lathia ITA Nos. 4784, 4828/MUM/2023 “ 6. Decision 6.1 This appeal has been filed by the appellant to this office that the This appeal has been filed by the appellant to this office that the This appeal has been filed by the appellant

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KALYAN vs. J D ELECTRIC WORKS, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4521/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 148

bogus purchases  delivery challans delivery challans  transport receipts transport receipts  Copies of confirmation from alleged hawala dealers Copies of confirmation from alleged hawala dealers  Copy of revised income tax return for AY 2011 Copy of revised income tax return for AY 2011-12 depicting Copy of revised income tax return for AY 2011 additional

OMKAR METAL AND ALLOYS CORPORATION ,C P TANK MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19. 2. 4, MATRU MANDIR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 2838/MUM/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Omkar Metal & Alloys Ito 19.2.4, Corporation, C P Tank Matru Mandir, Opp Bhatia Room No. 47, Balakrishna Vs. Hospital, Grant Road (West), Niwas, 2Nd Floor, 2Nd Mumbai-400007. Panjarapole Lane, Mumbai-400004. Pan No. Aaafo 4997 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Mr. H.M. Bhatt, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

purchase in the assessee’s income. By impugned order by CIT(A) directed to restrict the addition to income. By impugned order by CIT(A) directed to restrict the addition to income. By impugned order by CIT(A) directed to restrict the addition to the extent of 6.5% of alleged bogus

DCIT CC 7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S MAN INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the both the appeal of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 618/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. R.R. Makwana, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Mr. K. Gopal
Section 143(3)Section 68

Income-tax Appellate Tribunal tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT vide its order dated 25.11.2021 restricted the (ITAT). The ITAT vide its order dated 25.11.2021 restricted the (ITAT). The ITAT vide its order dated 25.11.2021 restricted the addition made on account of bogus purchases

DCIT CC-7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAN INDUSTRIES (I) LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the both the appeal of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 617/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. R.R. Makwana, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Mr. K. Gopal
Section 143(3)Section 68

Income-tax Appellate Tribunal tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT vide its order dated 25.11.2021 restricted the (ITAT). The ITAT vide its order dated 25.11.2021 restricted the (ITAT). The ITAT vide its order dated 25.11.2021 restricted the addition made on account of bogus purchases

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS MUMBAI vs. BHARAT HIRALAL SHAH, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for eal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 729/MUM/2025[2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito, Bharat Hiralal Shah, 501 5Th Floor, Income Tax Office 220, 4Th Floor Badrikashram 1St Piramal Chambers Lalbaug, Vs. Khetwadi Lane, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400004. Pan No. Aaeps 5511 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Khushali PandyaFor Respondent: Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR

addition of Rs. 14,60,201/- being 12.5% of total purchases of Rs. 1,16,81,604/ 12.5% of total purchases of Rs. 1,16,81,604/- made made on account of bogus purchases from 11 hawala traders, without appreciating the bogus purchases from 11 hawala traders, without appreciating the bogus purchases from 11 hawala traders, without appreciating the ratio

BHARAT DE vs. HI DAGHA,THANEVS.ITO WARD 3(1), KALYAN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3314/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Kalpesh Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Kumar Meena, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

Income-tax Department and on the basis of the tax Department and on the basis of the information of bogus purchase related to the assessee, the information of bogus purchase related to the assessee information of bogus purchase related to the assessee Assessing Officer has made the requisite belief Assessing Officer has made the requisite belief, , which in our opinion

BHARAT DE vs. HI DAGHA,THANEVS.ITO WARD 3(1), KALYAN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3315/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Kalpesh Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Kumar Meena, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

Income-tax Department and on the basis of the tax Department and on the basis of the information of bogus purchase related to the assessee, the information of bogus purchase related to the assessee information of bogus purchase related to the assessee Assessing Officer has made the requisite belief Assessing Officer has made the requisite belief, , which in our opinion

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SKYWAY INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, whereas appeals of the revenue are par...

ITA 2665/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21

bogus purchase ignoring the fact that the assessee failed failed failed to to to prove prove prove the the the genuineness genuineness genuineness of of of purchases, purchases, purchases, andany andany andany expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee cheques

ITO 6 (1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S A J COAL PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5718/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shubham Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR
Section 148Section 151

bogus purchases rather than the whole of such purchases Without appreciating that such allowance of such purchases Without appreciating that such allowance of such purchases Without appreciating that such allowance of 87.5% of expenditure imply allowance of purchases made in 87.5% of expenditure imply allowance of purchases made in penditure imply allowance of purchases made in cash from the 'grey

M/S A J COAL PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 6 (1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7289/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shubham Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR
Section 148Section 151

bogus purchases rather than the whole of such purchases Without appreciating that such allowance of such purchases Without appreciating that such allowance of such purchases Without appreciating that such allowance of 87.5% of expenditure imply allowance of purchases made in 87.5% of expenditure imply allowance of purchases made in penditure imply allowance of purchases made in cash from the 'grey

DCIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SILMOHAN GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

ITA 449/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 40A(3)Section 69C

addition @ 5% of purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,88,673/ purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,88,673/- at Rs. 14,14,434/ at Rs. 14,14,434/- instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase without appreciating the fact

DCIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SILMOHAN GEMS PRIVATE LIMTED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

ITA 450/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 40A(3)Section 69C

addition @ 5% of purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,88,673/ purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,88,673/- at Rs. 14,14,434/ at Rs. 14,14,434/- instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase without appreciating the fact

SILMOHAN GEMS PVT LTD. COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

ITA 472/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 40A(3)Section 69C

addition @ 5% of purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,88,673/ purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,88,673/- at Rs. 14,14,434/ at Rs. 14,14,434/- instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase without appreciating the fact

SILMOHAN GEMS PVT LTD. COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

ITA 471/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 40A(3)Section 69C

addition @ 5% of purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,88,673/ purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,88,673/- at Rs. 14,14,434/ at Rs. 14,14,434/- instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase instead of 100% on account of unexplained bogus purchase without appreciating the fact

M/S. GURJAR GEMS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 9(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 213/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Gurjar Gems Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Circle 9(3)(2), Plot No. F-17 Midc, Marol Aayakar Bhavan, Industrial Area, Opp. Seepz, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Andheri (E), Chakala Midc S.O., Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400093. Pan No. Aaacg 3685 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ravikant Pathak, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Milind S. Chavan, Dr : Date Of Hearing 24/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/03/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Ravikant Pathak, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Milind S. Chavan, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

addition to Rs. 7,04,000/- being 8% of alleged bogus purchases of Rs. being 8% of alleged bogus purchases of Rs. being 8% of alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 88,00,000/-made by the Appellant. made by the Appellant. The Appellant submits that it has actually purchased The Appellant submits that it has actually purchased The Appellant submits

DCIT-CC-8(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PAMSTAR EXPORTS, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3689/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mr. Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt (Sr. DR)

bogus unsecured loans to various beneficiaries. 14.3 The main thrust of the arguments of the appellant is that it has produced all the details before the AO with regard to genuineness of the purchases, however, the AO has merely relied on the information received from the DGIT (Inv.), Mumbai, and made the additions to the income