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.

11 results for “bogus purchases”+ Disallowanceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,868Delhi1,007Kolkata270Jaipur255Ahmedabad245Chennai221Bangalore169Chandigarh147Surat143Hyderabad96Pune95Indore95Raipur94Amritsar69Cochin59Lucknow54Rajkot53Guwahati50Nagpur50Visakhapatnam44Allahabad31Agra28Jodhpur26Ranchi16Cuttack12Dehradun11Patna11Jabalpur4Panaji2Varanasi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income11Section 143(2)8Section 2506Section 1326Section 153A6Search & Seizure6Section 133(6)5Section 40A(3)5Disallowance4Section 144

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

disallowance of purchases amounting to ₹48,13,275/- for AY 2018-19. The AO had treated these purchases from M/s Divine Alloys & Power Co. Ltd. as bogus

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: Disposed
2
Natural Justice2
Limitation/Time-bar2
ITAT Patna
26 Feb 2026
AY 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 was of opinion

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 of Nangalia Fabrics Pvt.\nLtd. vs. DCIT [(2014) 220 Taxman 17 (Guj.), the Hon'ble High Court\nhas held has held that once the assessee has furnished complete details\nof the transactions including invoices, payment details, accounting\nrecords, then the onus

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

RAJ CONSTRUCTION,KATIHAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHAGALPUR

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

ITA 398/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raj Construction Circle – 1(1), C/O Mahadev Ghosh, Bhagalpur, Advocate Vs. Bf-199, Salt Lake City, R.N. Plaza, R.B.S.S Kolkata-700064 Sahay Road, Bhagalpur, Bihar- 812001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajfr6306F Assessee By : Shri Mahadev Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Mahadev Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

disallowance of Sundry Creditors of the amount of 2,37,71,018 is arbitrary, unjustified, bad in law and liable to be annulled for the sake of natural justice. 2. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A)without applying his mind properly and ignoring the submission at the time of appeal hearing filed before

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD, KOLKATA

ITA 103/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250

disallowance of expenses of ₹20,44,002/- is hereby dismissed. 17. So far as, the issue of deletion of addition made u/s 68 of the Act is concerned, facts in brief are that the ld. AO while carrying out the assessment proceedings, noticed that during the year assessee has received the funds from certain companies. It was stated

PIYUSH & ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

ITA 78/PAT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250

disallowance of expenses of ₹20,44,002/- is hereby dismissed. 17. So far as, the issue of deletion of addition made u/s 68 of the Act is concerned, facts in brief are that the ld. AO while carrying out the assessment proceedings, noticed that during the year assessee has received the funds from certain companies. It was stated

PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

ITA 79/PAT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250

disallowance of expenses of ₹20,44,002/- is hereby dismissed. 17. So far as, the issue of deletion of addition made u/s 68 of the Act is concerned, facts in brief are that the ld. AO while carrying out the assessment proceedings, noticed that during the year assessee has received the funds from certain companies. It was stated

PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

ITA 80/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250

disallowance of expenses of ₹20,44,002/- is hereby dismissed. 17. So far as, the issue of deletion of addition made u/s 68 of the Act is concerned, facts in brief are that the ld. AO while carrying out the assessment proceedings, noticed that during the year assessee has received the funds from certain companies. It was stated

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. PIYUSH & ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

ITA 99/PAT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250

disallowance of expenses of ₹20,44,002/- is hereby dismissed. 17. So far as, the issue of deletion of addition made u/s 68 of the Act is concerned, facts in brief are that the ld. AO while carrying out the assessment proceedings, noticed that during the year assessee has received the funds from certain companies. It was stated

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD, KOLKATA

ITA 102/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250

disallowance of expenses of ₹20,44,002/- is hereby dismissed. 17. So far as, the issue of deletion of addition made u/s 68 of the Act is concerned, facts in brief are that the ld. AO while carrying out the assessment proceedings, noticed that during the year assessee has received the funds from certain companies. It was stated