BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI 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.

33 results for “section 68”+ Bogus/Accommodation Entryclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi70Mumbai33Kolkata21Surat4Ahmedabad4Bangalore4Raipur4Jaipur3Telangana1Hyderabad1Indore1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 14840Section 14737Section 6835Section 143(3)32Section 10(38)31Addition to Income23Section 143(2)15Section 271(1)(c)15Disallowance11Penny Stock

ACIT-4(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. QMAX SYNTHETICS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 7561/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2026AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

68 and settled judicial principles on bogus loans and\naccommodation entries.\n6.\nThe appellant craves leave to add, amend, or alter any of the\nabove grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing,\nin the interest of justice.”\n3.\nWe have considered the rival submission and have perused the\nmaterial on record.\n4.\nThe assessee is a company

SHRI BALKRISHNA GAJANAN THOPTE,THANE vs. DCIT CIR 2, KALYAN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3380/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 33 · Page 1 of 2

11
Section 26310
Reopening of Assessment10
ITAT Mumbai
10 Jan 2024
AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

bogus/accommodation entries and the same has been brought\nto tax u/s.68 of the Act.\nIn view of the above stated facts, the addition made by the\nassessing officer is sustained and the appeal of the appellant on\nthese grounds is dismissed.\n6.0 Ground No.5 is directed against the addition of 51,860/- on\naccount of commission paid for getting accommodation

NAVNIDHI STEEL AND ENGG CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3420/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

bogus/accommodation entries without supplying any material. The large number of said concerns were operating from 2-3 premises owned by Mr Bhanwarlal Jain as detailed in preceding para’s of this order. During search u/s 132(1) of 1961 Act, neither books of accounts of these benami concerns were recovered from their registered premises nor any stock of diamond

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. QMAX SYNTHETICS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 4378/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailacit-4(3)(1) Vs. M/S Qmax Synthetics R. No. 649, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., 5-B/174, Aayakar Bhavan, Sanjay Building, Mittal Mumbai – 400 020 Industrial Estate, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacq0206D Respondent .. Appellant

For Appellant: Ashok BansalFor Respondent: T. Shankar
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

bogus/accommodation entries on loan of Rs.1,64,00,000/- from the following 7 parties related to Shri Pravin Kumar Jain as under: Sr. Name of the concern Amount(Rs.) Interest (Rs.) No. 1. Casper Enterprises P. Ltd. 24,00,000 14,597 (Ostwal Trading (I) P. Ltd.) 2. Duke Business P. Ltd. (JPK 20,00,000 28,932 Trading

SWASTIK REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T.15(3), MUMBAI

ITA 6314/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

bogus/accommodation entries. From the facts found by the authorities, it was clear that the amount of loan was advanced through the account payee cheques and PANs were also furnished. The amount has been repaid through account payee cheques and the lenders has sufficient funds in their bank accounts not by cash deposited on the preceding date or when the cheques

SWASTIK REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 15(3), MUMBAI

ITA 800/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

bogus/accommodation entries. From the facts found by the authorities, it was clear that the amount of loan was advanced through the account payee cheques and PANs were also furnished. The amount has been repaid through account payee cheques and the lenders has sufficient funds in their bank accounts not by cash deposited on the preceding date or when the cheques

CHHAYA KETAN MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 33(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 6543/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri Nishit Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: \nShri Virabhadra Mahajan (Sr. DR)
Section 10(38)Section 14Section 143(3)

section 68 of the Act was wrongly\nPage 5\nITA No. 6543/Mum/2025\nΑ.Υ. 2014-15\nChhaya Ketan Mehta\napplied as, admittedly, the nature and source were duly explained in as\nmuch as the nature of the credit was the amount received on sale of\nshares and the sourceis through the broker from the Bombay Stock\nExchange on account

NIKHIL ASHOK SHIVDIKAR,PAREL MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 20 2 4 MUMBAI , LALBAUG PAREL

ITA 4639/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: him.

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 69C

bogus/accommodation entry of Long Term Capital Gains arising from purchase/sale of shares of Splash Media and Infra Ltd. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the Assessee has earned Long Term Capital Gains on sale of shares of Splash Media and Infra Ltd. [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Shares’] of INR.51,92,689/- which was claimed

SIRONA DENTAL SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4639/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA ( (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 69C

bogus/accommodation entry of Long Term Capital Gains arising from purchase/sale of shares of Splash Media and Infra Ltd. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the Assessee has earned Long Term Capital Gains on sale of shares of Splash Media and Infra Ltd. [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Shares’] of INR.51,92,689/- which was claimed

SHRI VIKRAM N. CHANDAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO, 19(3)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 70/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

section 133A by the DDIT (Inv.), Kolkata to state that he had provided accommodation entries in the alleged penny scrip. 4.1. Assessee had submitted that transaction in the said shares were subjected to STT levy and consideration of sale and purchase for the said scrip had been routed through normal banking channel and no addition can be made without backing

MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL HUF,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4250/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

bogus/accommodation entry as alleged by the ld. AO. It is also important to note that the operations and modus operandi of this regulated market does not in any way provide for any mechanism by which assessee can bring forth the identity of the buyers of his shares and their creditworthiness. Further, sale proceeds are received through the stock market process

MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-10(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3264/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

bogus/accommodation entry as alleged by the ld. AO. It is also important to note that the operations and modus operandi of this regulated market does not in any way provide for any mechanism by which assessee can bring forth the identity of the buyers of his shares and their creditworthiness. Further, sale proceeds are received through the stock market process

ITO-24(3)(1),MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBER, MUMBAI vs. RAMA RAJIV JAGDALE, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3131/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Haridas Bhat, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

section 133(6) to the purchaser of the 6 Rama Rajiv Jagdale., AY 2014-15 shares sold by the assessing, referred to as “exit providers” which according to him remained un-complied. Ld. Assessing Officer also referred to statement of various persons who according to him were running the racket of providing accommodation entries by manipulating the share prices

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

entries\nobtained amounting to Rs.3,03,05,713/- in shape of sale of\nshares of Capital Trade Links should not be added in your total\nincome for the year under consideration.” Further, while\ndrawing conclusion in para 7 for making the assessment, ld. AO\nagain writes in similar manner as “In view of the elaborate\ndiscussion made above, I hereby

NARENDRA SHANTILAL BAPNA,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-28(2)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4198/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarnarendra Shantilal Bapna V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Flat No. A2501, Plot No. R3 बनाम 28(2)(3) B Emerald Bay, Sector 14, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Nerul, Navi Mumbai – Station Complex, Vashi, Navi 400 706, Maharashtra Mumbai– 400703, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aclpb8458J Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.DR)
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68 of the Act. The Tribunal while dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue also observed on facts that these shares were purchased by respondent on the floor of Stock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries were taken, contract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of Stock Exchange. The ITAT therefore

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI vs. ATUL RAMCHANDRA KSHIRSAGAR, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 6294/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Kumar Agarwal, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Chandra Sinha, Ld. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Section 68 of the Act was called for.” II. The Honb’le Allahabad High Court in case of Rahul Vineet Traders (41 taxmann.com 86) has held as under- “The submission is wholly mis-conceived. In the search operation carried on in M/s Ganga Ram Agarwal and Companies, there is no admission by the assessee therein that they were involved giving

REKHA RAJESH JOGANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2916/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. Sashank Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Mr. R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 274Section 68Section 69C

section 133(6) to the purchaser of the shares sold by the assessing, referred to as “exit providers” which according to him remained un-complied. Ld. Assessing Officer also referred to statement of various persons who according to him were running the racket of providing accommodation entries by manipulating the share prices of alleged penny scrip of SRK Industries

SALONI GIRRAJKISHOR AGRAWAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 25(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3234/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankarsaloni Girrajkishor Agrawal V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1601/1602, Green Acre, बनाम –25(1)(1),Kautilya Bhavan, Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri Bandra Kurla Complex, (West), Mumbai – 400 053, Bandra (East), Mumbai – Maharashtra 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Anupa1692D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, (Sr. DR)
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

section 68 of the Act. The Tribunal while dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue also observed on facts that these shares were purchased by respondent on the floor of Stock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries were taken, contract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of Stock Exchange. The ITAT therefore

DHARMENDRA JAYANTILAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-31(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 3879/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Singh, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair,Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

bogus/accommodation entry as alleged by the ld. AO. Also, the operations and modus operandi of this regulated market does not in any way provide for any mechanism by which assessee can bring forth the identity of the buyers of his shares and their creditworthiness. Further, sale proceeds are received through the stock market process into the pre-identified bank account

DHARMENDRA JAYANTILAL SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-31(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 3897/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Singh, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair,Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

bogus/accommodation entry as alleged by the ld. AO. Also, the operations and modus operandi of this regulated market does not in any way provide for any mechanism by which assessee can bring forth the identity of the buyers of his shares and their creditworthiness. Further, sale proceeds are received through the stock market process into the pre-identified bank account