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.

2 results for “bogus purchases”+ Survey u/s 133Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai372 Delhi170 Kolkata93 Jaipur80 Bangalore57 Chennai41 Hyderabad36 Guwahati32 Chandigarh31 Ahmedabad30 Surat27 Rajkot26 Indore25 Visakhapatnam23 Raipur23 Pune16 Agra16 Patna10 Jodhpur8 Lucknow8 Amritsar4 Allahabad4 Jabalpur3 Nagpur2 Panaji2 Dehradun1 Cuttack1 Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 69C5 Section 143(3)4 Section 10(38)3 Section 133A3 Section 1473 Section 2502 Section 682 Section 1482 Addition to Income2

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

Survey u/s 133A2

survey u/s 133A assessee had surrendered income of Rs. 2.03 crores but while filing ITR in response to notice u/s 148 he has shown total income of Rs. 6,63,44,360/- whereas income assessed vide order u/s 143(3) dated 25/12/2018 was Rs. 4,81,11,724/-. As such there is additional income

VISHNUKUMAR RAMSWAROOP AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-4(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 619/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Rachit Thakar proxy counsel appeared on behalf of Shri Kapil Dewani, AdvocaFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR

Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

purchased 4000 equity shares on 12.10.2012, out of which assessee has sold 2500 equity shares costing to ₹27,500/-. Ld.AO based on information received in the course of survey operations u/s. 133A of the Act at the office premises of M/s. Devshyam Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata came to a conclusion that M/s. Kappac Pharma Ltd. is a penny stock