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.

47 results for “bogus purchases”+ Bogus Purchasesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,888Delhi1,606Kolkata480Ahmedabad408Jaipur381Chennai325Chandigarh218Bangalore207Surat192Hyderabad151Raipur151Pune145Indore136Rajkot125Amritsar87Nagpur77Guwahati70Lucknow70Visakhapatnam67Cochin64Agra50Patna47Jodhpur45Allahabad33Cuttack30Ranchi30Dehradun22Jabalpur13Varanasi8Panaji4

Key Topics

Addition to Income42Section 143(3)41Section 25027Section 14727Section 153A24Section 14822Section 271(1)(c)18Survey u/s 133A18Search & Seizure

M/S PSP TRADING PVT LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 2 (1), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 121/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Patna09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 37

bogus and fictitious purchases worth of\n₹49,98,500/- during the year from Divine Alloys & Power Co. Ltd. without

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), MUZAFFARPUR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL HUF, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as that of the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 290/PAT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

16
Section 143(2)15
Section 13214
Penalty12
ITAT Patna
18 Feb 2026
AY 2022-23
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

purchases were accepted as genuine but sales were treated as bogus, reveals a\npattern of inconsistent reasoning that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL HUF, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as that of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 301/PAT/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Md. AH Chowdhary, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

bogus commission income. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Patna erred in not considering the observation of the Special Auditor, in which he reported that no conclusive evidence regarding exempted sale, exempted purchase

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL HUF, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as that of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 291/PAT/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Md. AH Chowdhary, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

bogus commission income. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Patna erred in not considering the observation of the Special Auditor, in which he reported that no conclusive evidence regarding exempted sale, exempted purchase

RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL HUF,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENT CIR MZF, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as that of the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 302/PAT/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Feb 2026AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

purchases were accepted as genuine but sales were treated as bogus, reveals a\npattern of inconsistent reasoning that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), MUZAFFARPUR vs. RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL HUF, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as that of the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 289/PAT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

purchases were accepted as genuine but sales were treated as bogus, reveals a\npattern of inconsistent reasoning that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. SINCON INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 212/PAT/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Aug 2025AY 2021-22
Section 115Section 133(6)Section 69C

purchases made by the assessee cannot be treated as bogus in\nabsence of any evidence. Similarly, in the case

BBCPL-RCPL (JV),JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 122/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 127Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

bogus purchase bills of raw materials. 3.2. It is noted that against the gross receipt on account of sale

BALKRISHNA BHALOTIA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 123/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

bogus purchase bills of raw materials. 3.2. Further, the Assessing Officer has added unexplained sundry creditors (list provided

BBCPL-SKPL (JV),JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 124/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

bogus purchase bills of raw materials. 3.2. Further, the Assessing Officer has added unexplained and non- existent sundry

SHREE MANGALAM ALUMINIUM,PATNA vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 488/PAT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. Nos. 486 To 488/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 To 2016-2017 Shree Mangalam Aluminium,…...….………Appellant Pandey Plaza Building, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Abkfs3963M] -Vs.- Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,……………………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar

Section 106Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

bogus purchases to factor in suppression of alleged gross profit, no penalty can be levied for furnishing of inaccurate

SHREE MANGALAM ALUMINIUM,PATNA vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 486/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. Nos. 486 To 488/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 To 2016-2017 Shree Mangalam Aluminium,…...….………Appellant Pandey Plaza Building, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Abkfs3963M] -Vs.- Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,……………………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar

Section 106Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

bogus purchases to factor in suppression of alleged gross profit, no penalty can be levied for furnishing of inaccurate

SHREE MANGALAM ALUMINIUM,PATNA vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 487/PAT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. Nos. 486 To 488/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 To 2016-2017 Shree Mangalam Aluminium,…...….………Appellant Pandey Plaza Building, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Abkfs3963M] -Vs.- Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,……………………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar

Section 106Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

bogus purchases to factor in suppression of alleged gross profit, no penalty can be levied for furnishing of inaccurate

ITO, WARD-2(1), BEGUSARAI, BEGUSARAI vs. MANISH KUMAR MOTANI, KHAGARIA, BIHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and CO of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 442/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Ito, Ward 2(1), Begusarai Manish Kumar Motani, 3Rd Floor, G.S. Motors Building, Manish Kumar Motani, Hanuman Har Har Mahadev Chauk, Traders, Mill Road, Khagaria, Vs. Begusarai-851101, Begusarai, Khagaria, Bihari-851204 Bihar-851101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajjpm4263D Co No. 02/Pat/2025 (Arising In Ita No. 442/Pat/2024 For A.Y. 2017-18) Ito, Ward 2(1), Begusarai Manish Kumar Motani, 3Rd Floor, G.S. Motors Building, Manish Kumar Motani, Hanuman Har Har Mahadev Chauk, Traders, Mill Road, Khagaria, Vs. Begusarai-851101, Begusarai, Khagaria, Bihari-851204 Bihar-851101 (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri A.K. Rastogi, S.K. Duta, Ars Revenue By : Shri A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2026

For Appellant: S/Shri A.K. RastogiFor Respondent: Shri A.H. Chowdhary, DR
Section 133ASection 40A(3)

purchase expenditure by raising bogus claims, he disallowed said expenditure of Rs. 2.08 crores invoking section 40A(3) Commissioner

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA vs. SUSHILA SULTANIA, PATNA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 475/PAT/2024[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.475/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Circle-4, Patna……..........................…...........................……….……Appellant Vs. Sushila Sultania, Patna……….............…..….…...……........……...…..…..Respondent 503, Venkatesh Apartment, Dakbunglow Road, Budh Marg, Patna, Bihar-800001. [Pan: Acmps5390M] Appearances By: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Neelkhanth Kandelwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 26 , 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Against The Order Dated 21.05.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Only Issue Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Deleting The Addition Of Rs.1,84,74,698/- & Rs.8,79,748/- As Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 68 R.W.S. 115Bbe & U/S 69C Respectively. 3. Facts In Brief Are That The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The Act On 31.03.2021. The Said Notice Was Duly Complied By The Assessee By Filing Return Of Income On 22.04.2021 Declaring Total Income At Rs.19,11,200/-. The Assessing

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

purchase of shares thereby generating bogus LTCS and STCG. The Assessing Officer also discussed the money trail and fluctuation

SUNITA AGRAWAL,KOLKATA vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on this issue

ITA 148/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 38Section 68

purchase and sale of penny stock, the AO has concluded that since there were bogus penny stocks of EML, therefore

SANJAY KUMAR SHAH,ARARIA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, PURNIA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 222/PAT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

purchasing a huge volume of agricultural product from agriculturists. As a result, the disallowance of' 16,55,900/­ from out of total expenses claim remain totally arbitrary without any proof of bogus

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 179/PAT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 250

purchased shares via private placement from a company that later amalgamated with another listed company on Bombay Stock Exchange - After amalgamation, share prices rose sharply due to speculative activities - Based on findings from Investigation Wing which identified listed company as a bogus

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 180/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 250

purchased shares via private placement from a company that later amalgamated with another listed company on Bombay Stock Exchange - After amalgamation, share prices rose sharply due to speculative activities - Based on findings from Investigation Wing which identified listed company as a bogus

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 181/PAT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 250

purchased shares via private placement from a company that later amalgamated with another listed company on Bombay Stock Exchange - After amalgamation, share prices rose sharply due to speculative activities - Based on findings from Investigation Wing which identified listed company as a bogus