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.

122 results for “bogus purchases”+ Carry Forward of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,906Delhi471Kolkata356Ahmedabad234Jaipur174Chennai123Pune122Chandigarh116Surat102Bangalore78Hyderabad77Raipur68Nagpur62Cochin58Indore51Rajkot47Guwahati46Amritsar42Calcutta36Lucknow31Visakhapatnam29Cuttack20Allahabad11Jodhpur10Patna8Karnataka8Varanasi6Telangana5Agra4Ranchi3Orissa2SC2Dehradun1Jabalpur1Panaji1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)72Addition to Income68Section 14849Section 6845Section 153A39Section 13236Section 10(38)33Search & Seizure28Disallowance27

M/S. SHANDAR INTERIORS PVT. LD.,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX : 3,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 909/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, JCIT
Section 143Section 263

carried forward and no addition is called for on this account as the Pr.CIT did not make out a case of cessation of liabilities. Ld. AR submitted that the said balances are genuine. The provisions u/s.41(1) of the Act did not allow making of any additions when there is no cessation of liability. If the revenue’s case

M/S. SHANDAR INTERIORS PVT. LD.,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX : 3,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 122 · Page 1 of 7

Section 133A26
Section 14A24
Penny Stock13
ITA 908/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, JCIT
Section 143Section 263

carried forward and no addition is called for on this account as the Pr.CIT did not make out a case of cessation of liabilities. Ld. AR submitted that the said balances are genuine. The provisions u/s.41(1) of the Act did not allow making of any additions when there is no cessation of liability. If the revenue’s case

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA vs. KAY BOUVET ENGINEERING LIMITED, SATARA

ITA 1374/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar &
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 148

Loss Account including, in particular, sales and various expenses as also the quantitative details of purchases/sales/manufacturing/consumption etc. Further complete quantitative records of stock have been maintained in which no discrepancies have been found either by the auditors or the Assessing Officer. In particular, the Tax Audit Report furnished u/s 44AB of the Act gives the complete quantitative total

RAHUL CABLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1169/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1168 To 1170/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri S.N. DoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)

carried forward and no addition is called for on this account as the CIT did not make out a case of cessation of liabilities. Ld. Counsel submitted that the said balances are genuine. There is no cessation of liabilities. There is no scope for application of provisions u/s.41(1) of the Act for making of additions as implied

RAHUL CABLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1170/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1168 To 1170/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri S.N. DoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)

carried forward and no addition is called for on this account as the CIT did not make out a case of cessation of liabilities. Ld. Counsel submitted that the said balances are genuine. There is no cessation of liabilities. There is no scope for application of provisions u/s.41(1) of the Act for making of additions as implied

RAHUL CABLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1168/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1168 To 1170/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri S.N. DoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)

carried forward and no addition is called for on this account as the CIT did not make out a case of cessation of liabilities. Ld. Counsel submitted that the said balances are genuine. There is no cessation of liabilities. There is no scope for application of provisions u/s.41(1) of the Act for making of additions as implied

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE vs. M/S. BILCARE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 273/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

purchaser, therefore, the transaction was not undertaken at arm‟s length. C.O. No.14/PUN/2021 (iv) The Hon‟ble High Court of Republic Singapore had not determined the actual sale consideration and the whole transaction is premeditate, is dubious transactions entered into with the intention of claiming loss for availing the benefit of losses and proceeded to apply the ratio

M/S. BILCARE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 334/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

purchaser, therefore, the transaction was not undertaken at arm‟s length. C.O. No.14/PUN/2021 (iv) The Hon‟ble High Court of Republic Singapore had not determined the actual sale consideration and the whole transaction is premeditate, is dubious transactions entered into with the intention of claiming loss for availing the benefit of losses and proceeded to apply the ratio

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,SATARA CIRCLE,SATARA, SATARA vs. KAY BOUVET ENGINEERING LIMITED, SATARA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1392/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR and Manish M. Mehta
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 148

carried out only paper entry transactions without actual movement of goods / material being bogus purchases and bogus sales as circular trading for inflation of turnover. As per information it was found that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries who had CO Nos.28 & 33/PUN/2025 indulged in such bogus transactions and received accommodation entries to the tune of Rs.5

KHANDESH BUILDERS LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 749/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

bogus and iii. Not allowing speculation losses to be carried forward and no set off of speculation loss. 2. In facts, circumstances and position of law ld. CIT-Appeals II, Nashik erred in confirming addition of Rs. 2,55,00,000/- on account of shares subscription money received. 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or substitute

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 934/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

loss account and claimed that the same should be allowed while computing the capital gains. Assessee relied on the decision of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Infosys Technologies Vs. JCIT 109 TTJ 631 (Bang.). Assessee contended that the said expenses has been incurred in the normal course of business and the dematerialization helped the assessee significantly

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 607/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

loss account and claimed that the same should be allowed while computing the capital gains. Assessee relied on the decision of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Infosys Technologies Vs. JCIT 109 TTJ 631 (Bang.). Assessee contended that the said expenses has been incurred in the normal course of business and the dematerialization helped the assessee significantly

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 549/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

loss account and claimed that the same should be allowed while computing the capital gains. Assessee relied on the decision of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Infosys Technologies Vs. JCIT 109 TTJ 631 (Bang.). Assessee contended that the said expenses has been incurred in the normal course of business and the dematerialization helped the assessee significantly

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 550/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

loss account and claimed that the same should be allowed while computing the capital gains. Assessee relied on the decision of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Infosys Technologies Vs. JCIT 109 TTJ 631 (Bang.). Assessee contended that the said expenses has been incurred in the normal course of business and the dematerialization helped the assessee significantly

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. RAJAMUKHA STEEL AND ALLOYS LTD.,, JALNA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1341/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 145(3)Section 2

carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who directed AO to restrict the addition to Rs.5,00,000/- instead of Rs.4,11,18,717/- made by the AO by observing as under : “5. I have duly considered the submissions of the appellant. The AO noticed that the assessee company had made purchases of s.4,11,18,717/- from M/s. J.B.D. Enterprises

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. RDS CONSTRUCTION CO.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2733/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2731 To 2733/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Kolhapur. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Rds Construction Co., 233/3, Malati Towers, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur-416003. Pan : Aabfr4457M ……""यथ" / Respondent Revenue By : Shri Sanjeev Ghai Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are Three Appeals Under Consideration. Ita Nos.2731 & 2732/Pun/2016 Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Common Orders Of Cit(A)-2, Kolhapur Dated 26.09.2016 U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

bogus purchases are very much recorded in the books of account. 10.1 Considering the above, we are of the opinion, the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer in both the appeals are unsustainable on legal issue. Therefore, we find the orders of the CIT(A) in both the years are fair and reasonable and they do not call

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. RDS CONSTRUCTION CO.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2732/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2731 To 2733/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Kolhapur. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Rds Construction Co., 233/3, Malati Towers, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur-416003. Pan : Aabfr4457M ……""यथ" / Respondent Revenue By : Shri Sanjeev Ghai Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are Three Appeals Under Consideration. Ita Nos.2731 & 2732/Pun/2016 Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Common Orders Of Cit(A)-2, Kolhapur Dated 26.09.2016 U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

bogus purchases are very much recorded in the books of account. 10.1 Considering the above, we are of the opinion, the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer in both the appeals are unsustainable on legal issue. Therefore, we find the orders of the CIT(A) in both the years are fair and reasonable and they do not call

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. RDS CONSTRUCTION CO.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2731/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2731 To 2733/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Kolhapur. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Rds Construction Co., 233/3, Malati Towers, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur-416003. Pan : Aabfr4457M ……""यथ" / Respondent Revenue By : Shri Sanjeev Ghai Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are Three Appeals Under Consideration. Ita Nos.2731 & 2732/Pun/2016 Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Common Orders Of Cit(A)-2, Kolhapur Dated 26.09.2016 U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghai
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

bogus purchases are very much recorded in the books of account. 10.1 Considering the above, we are of the opinion, the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer in both the appeals are unsustainable on legal issue. Therefore, we find the orders of the CIT(A) in both the years are fair and reasonable and they do not call

SOPAN D. PATIL,,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 902/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chadhury

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

loss account of the assessee indicates total purchases of Rs.7.48 crore against total contract receipts of Rs.27.40 crore. The percentage of purchase to contract receipts comes at 27.29%. The ld. AR has placed on record a year-wise chart of Purchases, Contract receipts and Percentage of purchases to contract receipts in the preceding three years. Such a chart shows percentage

SOPAN D. PATIL,,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 903/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chadhury

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

loss account of the assessee indicates total purchases of Rs.7.48 crore against total contract receipts of Rs.27.40 crore. The percentage of purchase to contract receipts comes at 27.29%. The ld. AR has placed on record a year-wise chart of Purchases, Contract receipts and Percentage of purchases to contract receipts in the preceding three years. Such a chart shows percentage