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.

1,036 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 10(38)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,036Delhi564Jaipur216Kolkata191Chennai157Ahmedabad143Bangalore125Chandigarh122Hyderabad90Surat86Indore82Rajkot67Amritsar60Cochin57Pune56Raipur50Lucknow34Visakhapatnam33Nagpur30Allahabad27Jodhpur25Guwahati23Agra21Patna15Ranchi14Cuttack12Varanasi7Jabalpur6Dehradun5Panaji3

Key Topics

Section 6893Addition to Income84Section 14768Section 143(3)64Section 153C61Section 10(38)55Section 14851Section 153A38Section 271(1)(c)36Long Term Capital Gains

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1680/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Income Tax Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is computed in accordance with

Showing 1–20 of 1,036 · Page 1 of 52

...
33
Penny Stock27
Disallowance26

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1681/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Income Tax Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is computed in accordance with

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1679/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Income Tax Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is computed in accordance with

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1682/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Income Tax Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is computed in accordance with

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) MUMBAI , PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE

ITA 3026/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) MUMBAI, PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE MUMBAI

ITA 3027/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

ITA 3233/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

ITA 3222/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

ITA 3221/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (4) MUMBAI, PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE MUMBAI

ITA 3028/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

ITA 3232/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , MUMBAI

ITA 3220/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. PRITI NILESH JAIN DAGA, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4616/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

section 10(38) - Assessing Officer treated purchase as bogus and added it to total income Commissioner (Appeals) examined all relevant

PRITI NILESH JAIN DAGA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4507/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

section 10(38) - Assessing Officer treated purchase as bogus and added it to total income Commissioner (Appeals) examined all relevant

VIJAYA PRAKASH NAGORI ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 32(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3392/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Om Prakash Kantvijaya Prakash Nagori Vs. Ito, Ward, 32(2)(1) 409/C, Abhar Jp Road, Kautilya Bhawan, C-41- Seven Bungalows, Andhere 43, Avenue, 3, Near (W), Mumbai – 400 061. Videsh Bhavan, G Block Bkc Pan/Gir No. Aekpr2943H (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 263oSection 68

section 10(38) - Assessing Officer treated purchase as bogus and added it to total income - Commissioner (Appeals) examined all relevant

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

section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the ) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. On further appeal On further appeal, the ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. Aggrieved, , the ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal raising grounds reproduced above. the Revenue is in appeal raising grounds reproduced above. the Revenue is in appeal raising grounds reproduced

RAJENDRA KUMAR MUNDRA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1000/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Girish Agrawalrajendra Kumar Mundra Vs. Ito, Ward 24(3)(1) (Huf) Piramal Chamber C-28, Ameya Bldg, Behind Lalbaug, Mumbai – Ymca Dn Nagar Andheri (W) 400012. 400053. Pan/Gir No.Aadh6828J (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 263Section 68Section 69A

10(38), read with section 147, of 260 (Ahmedabad - Trib.) the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains IN THE ITAT - Income arising from transfer of long- AHMEDABAD BENCH 'B' term securities (Bogus transactions) - Pratik Suryakant Shah v. AY 2006-07 - Assesse purchased

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

38,601 73,28,364 1,03,97,840 1,03,97,840 44,57,489 Maharashtra 21,88,490 64,68,451 Pile Foundation Jay Khodiyar 64,86,857 1,33,78,824 35,24,070 Enterprises Vimalnath 36,10

DEVANG BHUPENDRA SHAH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 32(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4218/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankardevang Bhupendra Shah, V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – B/9, Neminath Apt., बनाम 32(1)(4), Kautilya Bhavan, Shimpoli Road, Borivali Bandra Kurla Complex, West, Mumbai – 400 092, Bandra (East), Mumbai– Maharashtra 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadps1211L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Kapadia,ARFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kasuri, (Sr. AR)
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

section 10(38) - Assessing Officer treated purchase as bogus and added it to total income Commissioner (Appeals) examined all relevant

MEENA HASMUKH SAVLA,MATUNGA MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is\nallowed

ITA 2910/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2025AY 2016-17
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

section 10(38) - Assessing officer denied claim and made certain additions into assessee's income on grounds that said gains were earned through bogus penny stock transactions and companies to whom sold shares belonged were bogus in nature Tribunal observing that assessee by submitting records of purchase