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.

36 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 133Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai824Delhi426Jaipur215Kolkata161Bangalore94Surat79Chennai66Ahmedabad57Indore46Hyderabad46Chandigarh45Guwahati37Visakhapatnam37Pune36Raipur27Rajkot26Cuttack20Agra17Lucknow15Patna9Nagpur8Jodhpur8Amritsar6Allahabad5Jabalpur3Dehradun2Panaji2Cochin2Telangana2Karnataka1Varanasi1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 133A35Section 143(3)28Section 13220Section 14820Survey u/s 133A20Section 271(1)(c)17Addition to Income17Section 14716Section 143(2)14Search & Seizure

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

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

ITA 1374/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 148

133A of a third party does not have evidentiary value, especially when the assessee has provided supporting documents and made payments through banking channels. The AO failed to establish the purchases as bogus.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections

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

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

12
Section 143(1)11
Business Income7
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

purchases is also bogus and the assessee would have earned only commission for providing such false entries in its books of account. He, therefore, added an amount of Rs.3,60,11,804/- being the commission @ 2% on such bogus sales amounting to Rs.1,80,05,90,205/- as unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Act. 7. Before

CHETAS CONTROL SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1241/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.D. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

bogus purchases and circumstances of the case, survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises

CHETAS CONTROL SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1244/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.D. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

bogus purchases and circumstances of the case, survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. COOPERATION METALS, PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2262/PUN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

133A of the Act was carried on 15.02.2013 in the case of the assessee. The Assessing Officer in the course of survey action had recorded statement of Shri Mafatlal N Shah u/s 131 of the Act. In the statement the Assessing Officer confronted the partner of the assessee regarding purchases of Rs.88,76,319/- from the parties M/s. Raj Metal

CO-OPERATION METALS,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2321/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

133A of the Act was carried on 15.02.2013 in the case of the assessee. The Assessing Officer in the course of survey action had recorded statement of Shri Mafatlal N Shah u/s 131 of the Act. In the statement the Assessing Officer confronted the partner of the assessee regarding purchases of Rs.88,76,319/- from the parties M/s. Raj Metal

CO-OPERATION METALS,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2319/PUN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

133A of the Act was carried on 15.02.2013 in the case of the assessee. The Assessing Officer in the course of survey action had recorded statement of Shri Mafatlal N Shah u/s 131 of the Act. In the statement the Assessing Officer confronted the partner of the assessee regarding purchases of Rs.88,76,319/- from the parties M/s. Raj Metal

CO-OPERATION METALS,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2320/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

133A of the Act was carried on 15.02.2013 in the case of the assessee. The Assessing Officer in the course of survey action had recorded statement of Shri Mafatlal N Shah u/s 131 of the Act. In the statement the Assessing Officer confronted the partner of the assessee regarding purchases of Rs.88,76,319/- from the parties M/s. Raj Metal

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. COOPERATION METALS, PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2263/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

133A of the Act was carried on 15.02.2013 in the case of the assessee. The Assessing Officer in the course of survey action had recorded statement of Shri Mafatlal N Shah u/s 131 of the Act. In the statement the Assessing Officer confronted the partner of the assessee regarding purchases of Rs.88,76,319/- from the parties M/s. Raj Metal

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. COOPERATION METALS, PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2271/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

133A of the Act was carried on 15.02.2013 in the case of the assessee. The Assessing Officer in the course of survey action had recorded statement of Shri Mafatlal N Shah u/s 131 of the Act. In the statement the Assessing Officer confronted the partner of the assessee regarding purchases of Rs.88,76,319/- from the parties M/s. Raj Metal

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. The assessee offered Rs.2,22,00,712/- as additional income for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.1,61,93,716/- for the assessment year 2010-11. During the assessment years under consideration, the assessee complied with the said declaration. Accordingly, the reassessment was completed accepting the revised income filed by the assessee. Thus, the reassessment has become

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. The assessee offered Rs.2,22,00,712/- as additional income for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.1,61,93,716/- for the assessment year 2010-11. During the assessment years under consideration, the assessee complied with the said declaration. Accordingly, the reassessment was completed accepting the revised income filed by the assessee. Thus, the reassessment has become

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. The assessee offered Rs.2,22,00,712/- as additional income for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.1,61,93,716/- for the assessment year 2010-11. During the assessment years under consideration, the assessee complied with the said declaration. Accordingly, the reassessment was completed accepting the revised income filed by the assessee. Thus, the reassessment has become

DCIT-CIRCLE 7 PUNE, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK PUNE vs. TRIO CHEMSUCROTECH ENG. PROJECTS PVT. LTD, PUNE

ITA 1047/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2025AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)

purchases and expenses and also based on the information collected from the assessee observed that the assessee company has arranged bogus expenses of Rs.24.24 crore which inter alia included bogus commission expenses also. When the assessee was confronted, it was submitted that these bogus losses have been arranged to cover up the inflated project value invoiced to TIL by Rs.26.55

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

ITA 1565/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya andFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

133A was carried out by the department and subsequent actions\nrevealed that the shares of the company were manipulated to generate bogus long\n\nterm capital gain / short term capital gain for various beneficiaries. Referring to\nthe statements of Shri. P Amresh Kumar, MD of PFLIL, Shri Abhinandan Jain,\nDirector of PFLIL and Shri. Naresh Jain he submitted that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

ITA 1555/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

133A was carried out by the department and subsequent actions\nrevealed that the shares of the company were manipulated to generate bogus long\n\n16\nITA Nos.1555/PUN/2024 & Ors\nCO Nos.2 to 5/PUN/2025\nterm capital gain / short term capital gain for various beneficiaries. Referring to\nthe statements of Shri. P Amresh Kumar, MD of PFLIL, Shri Abhinandan Jain,\nDirector of PFLIL

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. TARADEVI RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

ITA 497/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

133A was carried out by the department and subsequent actions\nrevealed that the shares of the company were manipulated to generate bogus long\nterm capital gain / short term capital gain for various beneficiaries. Referring to\nthe statements of Shri. P Amresh Kumar, MD of PFLIL, Shri Abhinandan Jain,\nDirector of PFLIL and Shri. Naresh Jain he submitted that

DINESHKUMAR RAMCHANDRA TULSYAN (HUF),,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 813/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dineshkumar Ramchandra Tulsyan (Huf) Ito, Ward 1(5), 214B, Laxmi Niwas, Mahatma Nagar, Vs. Nashik Nashik – 422007 Pan: Aachd5953R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Sumandevi Dineshkumar Tulsyan Ito, Ward 1(5), 214B, Laxmi Niwas, Mahatma Nagar, Vs. Nashik Nashik – 422007 Pan: Ackpt1322Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar (through virtual)
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144A

purchase of initial investment by the assessee and the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Nashik has erred in confirming the same. 6. Additions made without any evidence should be deleted. 7. The Assessment Order under section 143(3) dated 28/12/2016 passed by the Assessing Officer is bad in law and the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1. Nashik

ITO, NASHIK vs. ANKIT NARESH TULSIAN, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2233/PUN/2024[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025
For Appellant: Shri Pramod S Shingte, CAFor Respondent: Shri Uodol Raj Singh, DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 131Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

133A\nand section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the DDIT(Inv.)\nKolkata.\n3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in\nlaw, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating dated\n30.03.2015. Shri Anil Kumar Khemka confessed to facilitating\naccommodation entries through the manipulation of scraps,\nincluding MISHKAFIN and outlined the modus operandi

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

ITA 1177/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

section 133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of assessee and group cases on 04.01.2013. Statement on oath of Mr. Ravindra Dhondiram Shinde, Managing Director of assessee company and Shri Balwant Patil, Accountant was recorded. During the course of Survey action, purchases made by the assessee from financial year 2005-06 till the date of search were