Search: bogus purchases | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

14 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 271Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai14 Jaipur4 Patna3 Delhi2 Chandigarh2 Rajkot1 Kolkata1 Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 271B23 Section 14822 Section 271A18 Section 1519 Penalty8 Bogus Purchases7 Section 10(38)6 Limitation/Time-bar6 Condonation of Delay6 Addition to Income

JIGNESH SURESH SHAH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD,1,, THANE

ITA 5151/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 271Section 271B

bogus purchases. The AO also initiated penalty proceeding under section 271B for failure to get account audited. 3. The AO subsequently

MS. KRISHNA FASHION WORLD,CHEMBUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA 3271/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai

6

Section 143(2)4

22 Jul 2025

AY 2012-13

For Appellant: \nNoneFor Respondent: \nShri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR a/w

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151Section 250

271B and u/s 271(F) while framing assessment\nand passing order dated 31.03.2015 under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961.”\nITA No. 3271/Mum/2024 (AY - 2012-13):\nGround No 1: Illegal Assumption Of Jurisdiction, Order Passed Is Illegal Void-Ab-\nInitio\n(a) In the facts and circumstances of the case, National Faceless Appeal Centre\n(NFAC) erred

KRISHNA FASHION WORLD,CHEMBUR, MUMBAI vs. ITO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA 3273/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 3270 To 3273/Mum/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2013-14) M/S. Krishna Fashion V/S. Income Tax Officer World बिाम Income Tax Officer, Ward 803/804, T-6, Godrej 22(2)(1), Room No. 312, Prime Colony, Sahakar Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug Nagar No.2, Shell Colony, 400012 Chembur, Mumbai 400071 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajfk2799R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr A/W Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr Dr स िवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing 10.07.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 22.07.2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR a/w

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151Section 250

271B and u/s 271(F) while framing assessment and passing order dated 31.03.2015 under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961.” ITA No. 3271/Mum/2024 (AY - 2012-13): Ground No 1: Illegal Assumption Of Jurisdiction, Order Passed Is Illegal Void-Ab- Initio (a) In the facts and circumstances of the case, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in confirming that

MS. KRISHNA FASHION WORLD,CHEMBUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA 3270/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 3270 To 3273/Mum/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2013-14) M/S. Krishna Fashion V/S. Income Tax Officer World बिाम Income Tax Officer, Ward 803/804, T-6, Godrej 22(2)(1), Room No. 312, Prime Colony, Sahakar Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug Nagar No.2, Shell Colony, 400012 Chembur, Mumbai 400071 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajfk2799R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr A/W Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr Dr स िवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing 10.07.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 22.07.2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR a/w

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151Section 250

271B and u/s 271(F) while framing assessment and passing order dated 31.03.2015 under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961.” ITA No. 3271/Mum/2024 (AY - 2012-13): Ground No 1: Illegal Assumption Of Jurisdiction, Order Passed Is Illegal Void-Ab- Initio (a) In the facts and circumstances of the case, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in confirming that

KRISHNA FASHION WORLD,CHEMBUR, MUMBAI vs. ITO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA 3272/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 3270 To 3273/Mum/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2013-14) M/S. Krishna Fashion V/S. Income Tax Officer World बिाम Income Tax Officer, Ward 803/804, T-6, Godrej 22(2)(1), Room No. 312, Prime Colony, Sahakar Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug Nagar No.2, Shell Colony, 400012 Chembur, Mumbai 400071 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajfk2799R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr A/W Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr Dr स िवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing 10.07.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 22.07.2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR a/w

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151Section 250

271B and u/s 271(F) while framing assessment and passing order dated 31.03.2015 under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961.” ITA No. 3271/Mum/2024 (AY - 2012-13): Ground No 1: Illegal Assumption Of Jurisdiction, Order Passed Is Illegal Void-Ab- Initio (a) In the facts and circumstances of the case, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in confirming that

M/S HINGLAJ METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2805 to 2810/MUM/2022

ITA 2810/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal आअसं. 2805 से 2810 /मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2009-10 से 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmil A. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand

Section 271ASection 271B

section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’] in the respective assessment years. 2 ITA NO. 2805 TO 2810/MUM/2022(A.Y.2009-10 TO 2011-12) 2. Since, these appeals arise from identical set of facts all these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. 3. These appeals are time barred

M/S HINGLAJ METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2805 to 2810/MUM/2022

ITA 2807/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal आअसं. 2805 से 2810 /मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2009-10 से 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmil A. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand

Section 271ASection 271B

section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’] in the respective assessment years. 2 ITA NO. 2805 TO 2810/MUM/2022(A.Y.2009-10 TO 2011-12) 2. Since, these appeals arise from identical set of facts all these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. 3. These appeals are time barred

M/S HINGLAJ METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2805 to 2810/MUM/2022

ITA 2805/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal आअसं. 2805 से 2810 /मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2009-10 से 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmil A. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand

Section 271ASection 271B

section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’] in the respective assessment years. 2 ITA NO. 2805 TO 2810/MUM/2022(A.Y.2009-10 TO 2011-12) 2. Since, these appeals arise from identical set of facts all these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. 3. These appeals are time barred

M/S HINGLAJ METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2805 to 2810/MUM/2022

ITA 2806/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal आअसं. 2805 से 2810 /मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2009-10 से 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmil A. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand

Section 271ASection 271B

section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’] in the respective assessment years. 2 ITA NO. 2805 TO 2810/MUM/2022(A.Y.2009-10 TO 2011-12) 2. Since, these appeals arise from identical set of facts all these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. 3. These appeals are time barred

M/S HINGLAJ METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2805 to 2810/MUM/2022

ITA 2808/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal आअसं. 2805 से 2810 /मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2009-10 से 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmil A. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand

Section 271ASection 271B

section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’] in the respective assessment years. 2 ITA NO. 2805 TO 2810/MUM/2022(A.Y.2009-10 TO 2011-12) 2. Since, these appeals arise from identical set of facts all these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. 3. These appeals are time barred

M/S HINGLAJ METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2805 to 2810/MUM/2022

ITA 2809/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal आअसं. 2805 से 2810 /मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2009-10 से 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmil A. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand

Section 271ASection 271B

section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’] in the respective assessment years. 2 ITA NO. 2805 TO 2810/MUM/2022(A.Y.2009-10 TO 2011-12) 2. Since, these appeals arise from identical set of facts all these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. 3. These appeals are time barred

MAMTA MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 31(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1534/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.1442 /मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.1534 /मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2016-17) Mamta Mehta, B-3, Bldg No.3, Saibaba Enclave, Behind Citi Centre, Goregaon West Mumbai 400 062. Pan: Afxpm-6021-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 31(2)(3), Kautalya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Choughule सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Choughule

Section 10(38)Section 44A

bogus carried out by the assessee through brokers at the Stock Exchange. It is not emanating from the assessment order or the order of CIT(A) that the stock broker through whom assessee had purchased shares of “Prraneta” was one of the suspicious broker or was in any manner connected with operators/brokers involved in price rigging. No investigation was carried

MAMTA MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1442/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.1442 /मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.1534 /मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2016-17) Mamta Mehta, B-3, Bldg No.3, Saibaba Enclave, Behind Citi Centre, Goregaon West Mumbai 400 062. Pan: Afxpm-6021-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 31(2)(3), Kautalya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Choughule सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Choughule

Section 10(38)Section 44A

bogus carried out by the assessee through brokers at the Stock Exchange. It is not emanating from the assessment order or the order of CIT(A) that the stock broker through whom assessee had purchased shares of “Prraneta” was one of the suspicious broker or was in any manner connected with operators/brokers involved in price rigging. No investigation was carried

MS MILAN AGENCY,MUMBAI vs. ITO ASSESSEMENT UNIT, IT DEPT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5414/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Milan Agency Ito, Assessment Unit, It Deptt. Shop No. 6, Friends Shopping Vs. Centre, Azad Road, Andheri East, Mumbai-400069. Pan: Aaefm 8738 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal, Advocate & Om Kandalkar Revenue By : Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, Advocate & Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 145ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 274Section 44A

purchases. 4. Adding a sum of Rs.88,12,534/- to sales which in reality is in the nature of reimbursement against the expenditure incurred by your appellant, from the principal for the expenses incurred on their behalf. 5. Ignoring the correct computation of profit in terms of section 145A(ii) filed with the memo of appeal in Form