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.

48 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 133A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai782Delhi420Jaipur216Kolkata155Bangalore89Surat79Ahmedabad59Chennai57Pune48Chandigarh47Indore46Hyderabad38Guwahati37Raipur28Visakhapatnam27Rajkot25Cuttack20Agra17Lucknow14Patna9Nagpur9Jodhpur7Amritsar6Allahabad5Jabalpur3Dehradun2Panaji2Cochin2Telangana2Varanasi1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 133A47Section 143(3)45Section 271(1)(c)38Addition to Income30Survey u/s 133A30Section 14829Section 13219Section 143(2)17Search & Seizure

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

bogus purchases and appellant has furnished evidences in form of delivery challans, purchase bills etc. (mentioning the point of origin of goods, destination, detail of vehicle numbers in which goods were transported as well as name of consignor and consignee) relating to same before the AO. Thus, appellant had successfully discharged initial burden or onus of providing details of party

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

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

16
Section 14715
Section 153A12
Bogus Purchases11

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

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)

section 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises of assessee on 13/08/2013 to 14/08/2013. During the course of survey, statement on oath of Mr. Mahesh S. Deshmukh, Director of assessee Company was recorded and during the course of statement, he accepted following purchases as bogus purchases and offered the same for taxation in respective assessment years

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)

section 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises of assessee on 13/08/2013 to 14/08/2013. During the course of survey, statement on oath of Mr. Mahesh S. Deshmukh, Director of assessee Company was recorded and during the course of statement, he accepted following purchases as bogus purchases and offered the same for taxation in respective assessment years

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 134/PUN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No 134/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kolhapur. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Rds Construction Co., 233/3, Malati Towers, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur. Pin-416 001 Pan : Aabfr4457M ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ajay ModiFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Pathak
Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

133A of the Act was carried out at the premises of assessee on 04.01.2013. Pursuant to the survey, the assessee vide letter dated 08.01.2013 offered additional income for assessment year 2008-09, 2010-11 to 2012-13 of Rs.5,17,85,419/-. The basis for offering additional income was party wise list of purchases which were furnished by assessee along

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1302/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1302/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 1(1), Pune …. Vs. Chetas Control Systems Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.1, S.No.8+9, Chetas House, Shree Sidhatek Hsg. Society, Sutarwadi, Pashan, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pune – 411021 Pan: Aaacc7437N अऩीऱाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Gawli प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : None घोषणा की तारीख / सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2018

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh GawliFor Respondent: None
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 3Section 37

133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises of assessee. The Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings after noting the details of purchases made from Aquatech Solutions Pvt. Ltd., expenditure for construction of laboratory held as capital expenditure and after allowing 10% depreciation at ₹ 13 lakhs, balance amount of ₹ 1,17,00,000/- was capitalized

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

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

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

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

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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MAHALAXMI INFRAPROJECTS LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 143/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.142 To 145/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-1, Kolhapur …. Vs. Mahalaxmi Infraprojects Ltd., 223/3, S-1, B, Malati Towers, E Ward, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm2170P आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.146 & 147/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-1, Kolhapur …. Vs. Mahalaxmi Infraprojects Ltd., 223/3, S-1, B, Malati Towers, E Ward, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm2170P

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CITFor Respondent: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak and N.T. Jadhav
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

bogus purchases and the Revenue is not in appeal; hence the claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act is restricted to additional income of Rs.35,98,460/- only, which merits to be allowed in the hands of assessee. In respect of grounds of appeal No.2 and 3 raised by the Revenue, the learned Authorized Representative

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MAHALAXMI INFRAPROJECTS LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 147/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.142 To 145/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-1, Kolhapur …. Vs. Mahalaxmi Infraprojects Ltd., 223/3, S-1, B, Malati Towers, E Ward, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm2170P आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.146 & 147/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-1, Kolhapur …. Vs. Mahalaxmi Infraprojects Ltd., 223/3, S-1, B, Malati Towers, E Ward, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm2170P

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CITFor Respondent: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak and N.T. Jadhav
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

bogus purchases and the Revenue is not in appeal; hence the claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act is restricted to additional income of Rs.35,98,460/- only, which merits to be allowed in the hands of assessee. In respect of grounds of appeal No.2 and 3 raised by the Revenue, the learned Authorized Representative

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MAHALAXMI INFRAPROJECTS LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 145/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.142 To 145/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-1, Kolhapur …. Vs. Mahalaxmi Infraprojects Ltd., 223/3, S-1, B, Malati Towers, E Ward, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm2170P आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.146 & 147/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-1, Kolhapur …. Vs. Mahalaxmi Infraprojects Ltd., 223/3, S-1, B, Malati Towers, E Ward, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm2170P

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CITFor Respondent: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak and N.T. Jadhav
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

bogus purchases and the Revenue is not in appeal; hence the claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act is restricted to additional income of Rs.35,98,460/- only, which merits to be allowed in the hands of assessee. In respect of grounds of appeal No.2 and 3 raised by the Revenue, the learned Authorized Representative

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MAHALAXMI INFRAPROJECTS LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 146/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.142 To 145/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2010-11 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-1, Kolhapur …. Vs. Mahalaxmi Infraprojects Ltd., 223/3, S-1, B, Malati Towers, E Ward, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm2170P आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.146 & 147/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-1, Kolhapur …. Vs. Mahalaxmi Infraprojects Ltd., 223/3, S-1, B, Malati Towers, E Ward, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm2170P

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CITFor Respondent: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak and N.T. Jadhav
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

bogus purchases and the Revenue is not in appeal; hence the claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act is restricted to additional income of Rs.35,98,460/- only, which merits to be allowed in the hands of assessee. In respect of grounds of appeal No.2 and 3 raised by the Revenue, the learned Authorized Representative

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1,, JALGAON vs. M/S. MAHARASHTRA SOLVENT EXTRACTION PVT. LTD.,, JALGAON

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1640/PUN/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1434/Pun/2013 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

purchase of Soya seeds on behalf of the assessee. The total commission paid to the said HUF was Rs. 8,80,047/-. The first issue which is raised against the assessee is that it had not proved services rendered by the HUF. However, we find that similar services were availed by the assessee in earlier years and no disallowance

DCIT,JALGAON vs. MAHARASHTRA SOLVENT EXTRACTION P.LTD, JALGAON

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1434/PUN/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1434/Pun/2013 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

purchase of Soya seeds on behalf of the assessee. The total commission paid to the said HUF was Rs. 8,80,047/-. The first issue which is raised against the assessee is that it had not proved services rendered by the HUF. However, we find that similar services were availed by the assessee in earlier years and no disallowance

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

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