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.

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

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai851Delhi409Jaipur210Kolkata163Bangalore85Surat76Chennai65Ahmedabad54Chandigarh50Pune47Indore46Hyderabad45Guwahati33Raipur31Visakhapatnam27Rajkot26Agra17Cuttack15Lucknow13Patna10Nagpur9Jodhpur8Amritsar6Allahabad5Panaji3Jabalpur3Cochin2Dehradun2Calcutta1Telangana1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 6817Section 153C10Addition to Income9Section 139(1)6Unexplained Cash Credit6Section 143(3)5Section 69C5Section 1475Search & Seizure

I.T.O. WARD -2(2),, NAGPUR vs. SHRI RAMANSINGH BALBIRSINGH SWANNI, NAGPUR

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

ITA 472/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Ito Vs. Ramsingh Balbirsingh Swanni Ward 2(2) Room No. 315, Prop: Industrial Supply Syndicate 3Rd Floor Aayakar Bhawan Bf-2, Amar Vihar, Kamptee Road Telangkhedi Road, Nagpur Civil Lines, Nagpur Pan No.:Aybps 9233 L Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Vitthal M Bhosle Jcit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Abhay Agarwal, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 26/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/07/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Department Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A)-4, Nagpur Dated 17/05/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y. 2009-10 Wherein The Department Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M Bhosle JCIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

survey u/s 133A of the Act at the business premises of the assessee on 11-02-2013. The 3 ITA 472/NAG/ 2016 ITO, WARD 2(2), NAGPUR VS RAMANSINGH BALBIRSINGH SWANNI AO subsequently issued a notice u/s 148 of the Act on 19-02-2014 after recording the reasons for reopening the case. During the course of assessment proceedings

5
Section 133A4
Section 1484
Survey u/s 133A3

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 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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. SMITA KOTHARI , NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 143/NAG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri O.P. Kant, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Chandana Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Ambpk 2497 G Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Smita Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1191 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Sunita Suresh Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Affpk 2282 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Seema Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1190 P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Karan Kothari Aabhushan

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P Shah (CA)For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Hedaoo (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 68

survey action u/s 133A was also carried out in the case of M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private Limited (HLFCPL) at Kolkata. It was found that during the year under 22 ITA 142/NAG/2019_ ACIT Vs Smt. Chandana Kothari & Ors. Appeals consideration unsecured loans of Rs. 95,00,000/- was taken by the assessee from M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CRICLE -2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. CHANDANA KOTHARI , NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 142/NAG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri O.P. Kant, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Chandana Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Ambpk 2497 G Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Smita Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1191 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Sunita Suresh Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Affpk 2282 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Seema Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1190 P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Karan Kothari Aabhushan

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P Shah (CA)For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Hedaoo (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 68

survey action u/s 133A was also carried out in the case of M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private Limited (HLFCPL) at Kolkata. It was found that during the year under 22 ITA 142/NAG/2019_ ACIT Vs Smt. Chandana Kothari & Ors. Appeals consideration unsecured loans of Rs. 95,00,000/- was taken by the assessee from M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT . SEEMA KOTHARI , NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 145/NAG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri O.P. Kant, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Chandana Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Ambpk 2497 G Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Smita Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1191 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Sunita Suresh Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Affpk 2282 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Seema Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1190 P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Karan Kothari Aabhushan

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P Shah (CA)For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Hedaoo (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 68

survey action u/s 133A was also carried out in the case of M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private Limited (HLFCPL) at Kolkata. It was found that during the year under 22 ITA 142/NAG/2019_ ACIT Vs Smt. Chandana Kothari & Ors. Appeals consideration unsecured loans of Rs. 95,00,000/- was taken by the assessee from M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S KARAN KOTHARI AABHUSHAN PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 146/NAG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri O.P. Kant, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Chandana Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Ambpk 2497 G Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Smita Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1191 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Sunita Suresh Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Affpk 2282 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Seema Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1190 P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Karan Kothari Aabhushan

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P Shah (CA)For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Hedaoo (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 68

survey action u/s 133A was also carried out in the case of M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private Limited (HLFCPL) at Kolkata. It was found that during the year under 22 ITA 142/NAG/2019_ ACIT Vs Smt. Chandana Kothari & Ors. Appeals consideration unsecured loans of Rs. 95,00,000/- was taken by the assessee from M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private

ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT . SUNITA SURESH KOTHARI , NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 144/NAG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri O.P. Kant, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Chandana Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Ambpk 2497 G Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Smita Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1191 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Sunita Suresh Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Affpk 2282 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Vs. Smt. Seema Kothari, Central Circle-2(2), Kothari Bhawan, Naik Lane, Nagpur. Itwari, Nagpur-440002. Pan No.: Alnpk 1190 P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Karan Kothari Aabhushan

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P Shah (CA)For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Hedaoo (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 68

survey action u/s 133A was also carried out in the case of M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private Limited (HLFCPL) at Kolkata. It was found that during the year under 22 ITA 142/NAG/2019_ ACIT Vs Smt. Chandana Kothari & Ors. Appeals consideration unsecured loans of Rs. 95,00,000/- was taken by the assessee from M/s. Haldaur Leasing & Finance Company Private

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

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDLAL B MALOO, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s cross objection is partly allowed

ITA 311/NAG/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Jun 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 147Section 148Section 153A

survey u/s 133A, no evidence of rendering the services were found. Under such circumstances also the whole of such amount would be taxable in the assessee's hand. He further argued that then AO did not give credit to the amount as transport charges. He further contented that the present AO treated the same as interest and added the whole