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.

13 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 801A(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Hyderabad20Delhi15Mumbai13Chandigarh7Jaipur5Kolkata4Lucknow3Indore2Pune1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)24Section 801A21Section 80I18Deduction13Section 153A11Addition to Income10Section 2639Disallowance9Bogus Purchases8

DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue s filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4940/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S., Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R
Section 801A

4)(i) of the Act, to which Ld. CIT in his report under Rule 9 raised to which Ld. CIT in his report under Rule 9 raised to which Ld. CIT in his report under Rule 9 raised the objections vis the objections vis-à-vis merits of the claim, which are vis merits of the claim, which are identical

DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue s filed by the revenue are dismissed

Section 1327
Search & Seizure7
Section 801A(4)6
ITA 4942/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: Disposed
ITAT Mumbai
14 Jan 2025
AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S., Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R
Section 801A

4)(i) of the Act, to which Ld. CIT in his report under Rule 9 raised to which Ld. CIT in his report under Rule 9 raised to which Ld. CIT in his report under Rule 9 raised the objections vis the objections vis-à-vis merits of the claim, which are vis merits of the claim, which are identical

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2486/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that the telescoping benefit will lead to double relief as the Assessee has claimed deduction u/s 801A(4) of the Act. 5. That a copy of Form no. 36 so filed by the Revenue Authorities was served on the Assessee on 23.07.2018. Page No. 39 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2485/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that the telescoping benefit will lead to double relief as the Assessee has claimed deduction u/s 801A(4) of the Act. 5. That a copy of Form no. 36 so filed by the Revenue Authorities was served on the Assessee on 23.07.2018. Page No. 39 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018

DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue\nare dismissed

ITA 4944/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R
Section 801A

4)(i) of the\nAct, to which Ld. CIT in his report under Rule 9 raised\nthe objections vis-à-vis merits of the claim, which are\nidentical to the grounds raised in the present appeal by\nthe department. Therefore in this way the grounds raised\nin the present appeal are identical to the objections\nraised by the department before

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

ITA 2668/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

section 1534 of the I.T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" ii. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation

THE DY COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1) ., MUMBAI vs. RPS INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

ITA 2710/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

section 153A of the I.T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" ii. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation

AQUA TECH SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PCIT (CENTRAL)-3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3855/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Acccountant Member

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan &For Respondent: Shri. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 801A(4)

bogus transactions, receipts from such transactions and the profit element on such contract receipts from L&T directly affects the genuineness of the corresponding purchase costs and claim of deduction u/s 801A(4) of the Act which remained unverified during the course of reassessment proceedings Hence, element of loss of revenue is present in reassessment order passed

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S PRITI CONSTRUCTION , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

ITA 2674/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

801A, hence the issue as to whether addition can be made in absence of incriminating material under the provision has not been decided conclusively by Hon'ble Supreme Court." iii.&iv Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the M/s. Priti Construction, Mumbai. addition of bogus purchase expenses

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AIR INDIA BUILDING, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. PRATIBHA INDUSTRIES LTD , KURLA WEST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4344/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 801ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

section 801A(4) of the IT Act, 1961.” 3. None appeared on behalf of the respondent-assessee despite service of notice. Accordingly, appeal is being decided on the basis of material on record. 4. The brief facts are that in this case return of income was filed on 30/11/2015 declaring total income of Rs.’Nil’ after claiming deduction u/s. 80IA

THE DY.COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1) ., MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHAH & PARIKH, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2704/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Dcit, Vs. M/S Shah & Parikh Central Circle 5(1), 2, Vallabh Niwas, Room No. 1928, 19Th Malviya Road, Floor, Air India Bldg, Vile Parle(E), Nariman Point, Mumbai-400057 Mumbai – 400021. Pan/Gir No. : Aajfs4684D Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 801A

801A, hence the issue as to whether addition can be made in absence of incriminating material under the provision has not been decided conclusively by Hon'ble Supreme Court." 3. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,91,194/- on account of bogus

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SPECO INFRASTRUCTURE, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

ITA 2706/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 801A

section 153A of the I.T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2625/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Dcit, Vs. M/S Rps Priti Jv, Central Circle 5(1), C-113, Shyamkamal Room No. 1928, 19Th Bldg, 27 Tejpal Road, Floor, Air India Bldg, Agarwal Market, Vile Nariman Point, Parle (E), Mumbai – 400021. Mumbai-400057. Pan/Gir No. : Aabar7230F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 801A

section 153A of the 1. T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing