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.

526 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 145clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai526Delhi257Jaipur143Chandigarh85Chennai82Ahmedabad76Bangalore64Surat61Kolkata59Cochin57Raipur48Agra25Allahabad25Rajkot24Jodhpur24Pune21Amritsar21Lucknow18Nagpur16Indore16Guwahati13Hyderabad13Patna10Visakhapatnam6Dehradun4Cuttack2Panaji1Ranchi1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income72Section 14858Section 69C57Section 143(3)51Section 14746Disallowance37Section 14A33Bogus Purchases30Section 13229

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

Showing 1–20 of 526 · Page 1 of 27

...
Section 6829
Section 271(1)(c)28
Survey u/s 133A18

section 145 of the Act. circumstances, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire bogus circumstances, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire bogus circumstances, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire bogus purchases

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

section 145 of the Act. circumstances, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire bogus circumstances, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire bogus circumstances, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire bogus purchases

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

purchase bills. The Assessing Officer accordingly rejected the books result of the assessee invoking section books result of the assessee invoking section 145(3) 145(3) of the Act and made addition for the entire bogus

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

purchase bills. The Assessing Officer accordingly rejected the books result of the assessee invoking section books result of the assessee invoking section 145(3) 145(3) of the Act and made addition for the entire bogus

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

bogus purchases from 11 hawala traders, without considering that om 11 hawala traders, without considering that after invocation of provisions of section 145

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

purchases of Rs.76404685/-. Omkar Metal and Alloys Corp. 2 Provisions of the Act ought to have been properly construed and Provisions of the Act ought to have been properly construe Provisions of the Act ought to have been properly construe regard being had to facts of the case such addition should not regard being had to facts of the case

MANISH KANTILAL KAPADIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC -8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals

ITA 264/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, CIT-DR

bogus purchases and sales. Invoking section 145(3) of the Act, he rejected the books of account and, treating the e rejected

MANISH KANTILAL KAPADIA ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals

ITA 321/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, CIT-DR

bogus purchases and sales. Invoking section 145(3) of the Act, he rejected the books of account and, treating the e rejected

SUMAN GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT -CC- 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3858/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Section 145(3) of the Act. It has been held by Assessing Officer in Para No. 21 of the assessment order that- "From the facts stated above and after considering the submissions made by the assessee, there is little doubt that the purchases made from the various hawala parties by the assessee were done with the purpose and intention

SUMAN GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - CC- 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3857/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Section 145(3) of the Act. It has been held by Assessing Officer in Para No. 21 of the assessment order that- "From the facts stated above and after considering the submissions made by the assessee, there is little doubt that the purchases made from the various hawala parties by the assessee were done with the purpose and intention

VINIPUL INORGANICS FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHEMBUR, MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 14 (3) (2), MUMBAI, MAHARSHI KARVE ROAD, MUMBAI

In the result both the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2510/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sh.Narendra Kumar Choudhry () & Shri S Rifaur Rahman ()

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 254Section 69C

bogus purchases of Rs. 2,39,83,261/- , which were held to be non-genuine by the authorities below, which addition came to Rs. 29,97,908/- which addition was confirmed by the learned CIT(A). . In such circumstances ,GP ratio needs to be estimated which definitely involved some estimation/guess work but the said estimation/guess work should be fair , honest

VINIPUL INORGANICS FOODS PVT LTD,CHEMBUR, MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 14 (3) (2), MUMBAI, MAHARSHI KARVE ROAD, MUMBAI

In the result both the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2509/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh.Narendra Kumar Choudhry () & Shri S Rifaur Rahman ()

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 254Section 69C

bogus purchases of Rs. 2,39,83,261/- , which were held to be non-genuine by the authorities below, which addition came to Rs. 29,97,908/- which addition was confirmed by the learned CIT(A). . In such circumstances ,GP ratio needs to be estimated which definitely involved some estimation/guess work but the said estimation/guess work should be fair , honest

ITO, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. SKA TECHINFRA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stand dismissed on merits, whereas the CO filed by the Assessee stand dismissed being not pressed

ITA 4369/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Sawant, Ld. Sr. A.R
Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69C

145(3) of the Act. The Assessee with regard to the non-providing the details qua actual movement/supply of goods has claimed that it has acted as an intermediary between the supplier and the sellers, as it is the modus operandi of the Assessee to purchase the fabrics as and when the order is received from the buyer and consequently

ITO 19.3.1, MUMBAI vs. SALEM STEEL INDUSTRIES, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1299/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, CIT-DRFor Respondent: None
Section 250Section 37Section 68Section 69CSection 74

section deciding the issue on bogus purchases, without considering that after invocation of provisions of 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S ASIAN STAR COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2778/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S Asian Star Company Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3) Room No.803, 8Th Floor, 114-C, Mitta Court, Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. M.K. Road, Churchgate, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca4856B Assessee By : Shri Suchek Anchaliya, Ms. Vaishali More, Ars Revenue By : Smt. Shailja Rai, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Smt. Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143Section 148

145 of the paper book submitted during the appellate proceedings), following facts emerge- Name of the Concern Total Purchases Purchases during doubte d by FY 2011-12 the AO M/s Nayam Exim Pvt. ₹ 5,29,25,831/- ₹ 2.49 Cr Ltd. M/s M B Offshore ₹6,97,32,762/- ₹ 2.19 Cr Distributors Pvt Ltd M/s Riddhi Exim

BALAJI BULLIONS AND COMMODITIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3755/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Jha, Adv
Section 133ASection 143(1)

bogus purchase of Rs.417,87,20,218/ Rs.417,87,20,218/- which has been provisions of section 115BBE, t held to be taxable u/s 69C will be chargeable to tax at the rate of 60% u/s 115BBE. held to be taxable u/s 69C will be chargeable to tax at the rate of 60% u/s 115BBE. held to be taxable

ACIT-19(1), MUMBAI vs. PARUL DIAMOND, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal and cross-objection filed by the revenue as well as the assessee respectively, stands dismissed

ITA 6992/MUM/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 37Section 68

section 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer acquired the mandate even to add the whale amount of purchases found as bogus

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 (1) , MUMBAI vs. LLOYDS ENTERPRISES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, for all the

ITA 3072/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153C

Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1961\nThe assessee is involved in providing purchases accommodation bills, sales accommodation bills and misusing LC funding facility\n\nThe assessee company has total turnover of Rs 7592021599/- for the assessment year under consideration. Total bogus

LLOYDS METALS AND ENERGY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -7(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2646/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153C

Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 The assessee is involved in providing purchases accommodation bills, sales accommodation bills and misusing LC funding facility The assessee company has total turnover of Rs 7592021599/- for the assessment year under consideration. Total bogus

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 (1), MUMBAI vs. LLOYDS METALS AND ENERGY LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 3079/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRESH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153C

Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 The assessee is involved in providing purchases accommodation bills, sales accommodation bills and misusing LC funding facility The assessee company has total turnover of Rs 7592021599/- for the assessment year under consideration. Total bogus