Search: bogus purchases | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases 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.

17 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 69Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,708 Delhi578 Jaipur203 Kolkata192 Chandigarh118 Bangalore77 Surat74 Ahmedabad66 Chennai61 Pune57 Rajkot47 Amritsar45 Indore41 Hyderabad38 Raipur34 Agra23 Guwahati23 Visakhapatnam19 Nagpur17 Lucknow15 Calcutta8 Jodhpur7 Cuttack4 Dehradun3 Varanasi2 Telangana1 Patna1 Jabalpur1 Cochin1 Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 69C25 Addition to Income17 Section 14811 Section 689 Section 10(38)9 Section 2507 Section 148A6 Section 1456 Section 142A6 Bogus Purchases

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 44ASection 69C

5

Natural Justice4

purchases as bogus under section 69C." In the case of CIT v. Bhagwati Developers Pvt. Ltd. [2003] 261 ITR 658 (Cal.) it is held

SUNRISE STRUCTURALS & ENGINEERING PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4 NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 167/NAG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roysunrise Structural & Acit/Dcit, Circle-4, Engineering P. Ltd., A10, Vs Nagpur Hingna Midc, Nagpur (Urban), Nagpur-440016 Pan : Aaccs 3220 M Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 250Section 69C

purchase made by assessee is from bogus party and therefore it was correctly disallowed in the assessment framed by invoking the provisions of section 69C

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER , NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 47/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

purchasers of the flats. It is beyond the concept of preponderance and human probabilities that a businessman has ventured into a commercial venture only to make loos. [iv] Although such amended provision from 01.10.2014 with reference to Valuation Officer does not require rejection of books of accounts, but there must be some compelling circumstances to refer the valuation particularly when

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 48/NAG/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

purchasers of the flats. It is beyond the concept of preponderance and human probabilities that a businessman has ventured into a commercial venture only to make loos. [iv] Although such amended provision from 01.10.2014 with reference to Valuation Officer does not require rejection of books of accounts, but there must be some compelling circumstances to refer the valuation particularly when

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA RADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 49/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

purchasers of the flats. It is beyond the concept of preponderance and human probabilities that a businessman has ventured into a commercial venture only to make loos. [iv] Although such amended provision from 01.10.2014 with reference to Valuation Officer does not require rejection of books of accounts, but there must be some compelling circumstances to refer the valuation particularly when

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 27/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

purchasers of the flats. It is beyond the concept of preponderance and human probabilities that a businessman has ventured into a commercial venture only to make loos. [iv] Although such amended provision from 01.10.2014 with reference to Valuation Officer does not require rejection of books of accounts, but there must be some compelling circumstances to refer the valuation particularly when

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 26/NAG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

purchasers of the flats. It is beyond the concept of preponderance and human probabilities that a businessman has ventured into a commercial venture only to make loos. [iv] Although such amended provision from 01.10.2014 with reference to Valuation Officer does not require rejection of books of accounts, but there must be some compelling circumstances to refer the valuation particularly when

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 140/NAG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

purchasers of the flats. It is beyond the concept of preponderance and human probabilities that a businessman has ventured into a commercial venture only to make loos. [iv] Although such amended provision from 01.10.2014 with reference to Valuation Officer does not require rejection of books of accounts, but there must be some compelling circumstances to refer the valuation particularly when

SUBHASH BADRIPRASAD SHAHU,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(3), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is partly allowed

ITA 421/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur07 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesubhash Badriprasad Shahu, Plot No.84, Near Annapurna Dall Mill, Bagad Ganj, Small Factory Area ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 008. Maharashtra. Pan – Agqps9660N V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(3), Nagpur Assessee By :Shri. Abhay Agrawal.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri. Abhay Agrawal.A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

bogus purchases under section 69C of the Act. 4. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned AO erred

VGI MARKETING DIVISION,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, AKOLA

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 309/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Shubham JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 133(6)Section 263Section 69C

purchase claimed by the assessee against the parties were bogus. The PCIT referred to Section 69C of the Act and pointed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. SHIKHA INDRAKUMAR AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 239/NAG/2023[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

section 69C of the Act. 6 7. The learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that the assessee had furnished complete documentary evidences before the Assessing Officer in support of the purchase and sale of shares, including share allotment documents, demat account statements evidencing entry and exit of shares, contract notes issued by the registered stock broker, ledger account

DCIT-CC-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. INDRAKUMAR GHISULAL AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 220/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

purchase and sale of shares are treated as bogus and sham and the entire amount of LTCG of Rs.1,32,68,850/- on sale of shares of M/s GCM Securities Ltd. is disallowed u/s 68 of the Act 1961 and added to total income of the assessee. Ld. AO also made addition of Rs.4,12,466/- as 3% of sale

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION CIRCLE NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. VIDHARBHA BAHUUDESHIYA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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

ITA 789/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha Sr.DR

Section 12ASection 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 148ASection 68Section 69C

purchase / bogus sale transactions with various entities controlled and managed by Shri Rajesh G. Mehta. During the course of recording of his statement on oath, Shri Rajesh G. Mehta also provided the details of entities controlled and managed by him and the company M/s. Aneri Fincap Ltd, was one of the entities controlled and managed by Shri Rajesh G. Mehta

RAMSWROOP AGARWAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 418/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 250Section 69C

bogus purchases under section 69C of the Act. 2 Ramswroop Agarwal 3. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned

RAJESH SARDA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, the addition of undisclosed income under section 68 is deleted

ITA 44/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Sarda, Acit, Central Circle – 2(2), Nagpur 14, Daga Lay–Out, Ambazari Road, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440033. Maharashtra – 440001. [Pan: Ahaps4925M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 153ASection 234ASection 254(1)Section 68Section 69C

69C of the I.T. Act at Rs.56,54,511/- in the absence of any evidence on record merely on basis of surmise and conjecture. The addition made is unjustified and arbitrary. 3) The learned A.O. and Hon'ble CIT(A) ought to have held that all the conditions as stipulated u/s 10(38) are complied with and hence surplus

CIAN AGRO INDUSTRIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

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

ITA 18/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar

section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"). Thus, the issue involved remained unadjudicated in its right perspective in a holistic manner. It is also a fact that assessment proceedings were partially carried out during the COVID–19 period. The learned Authorised Representative (for short "the A.R.") humbly prayed that the order may be remanded back

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 204/NAG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur Pan No.:Aanpg 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal By Revenue Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur Dated 30/03/2017 In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 4/198/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 68Section 69C

69C of I.T. Act 1961 at Rs.28,67,126/- as alleged expenditure on account of commission paid for bringing back money in his books as bogus long term capital gain. The A.O. has computed the aforesaid sum as 5% of sale proceeds of share reflected in books of account. 5. During the previous year relevant to Asstt. Year