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.

83 results for “bogus purchases”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai907Delhi543Jaipur222Ahmedabad187Kolkata146Bangalore139Chennai112Chandigarh92Rajkot83Raipur83Indore71Hyderabad70Amritsar63Cochin58Pune56Surat54Nagpur33Allahabad30Lucknow28Agra26Guwahati25Patna23Jodhpur17Visakhapatnam14Cuttack9Dehradun8Jabalpur6Ranchi2Varanasi2Panaji2

Key Topics

Addition to Income67Section 25054Section 6839Section 143(3)36Section 14729Section 271(1)(c)26Bogus Purchases26Section 143(2)23Natural Justice22Section 148

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR vs. SHANTA TECHNO PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR

ITA 155/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 155/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

bogus purchases/ sham transactions, the observations of this tribunal in the case of Subedar Pathak vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Raipur, in ITA No. 338/RPR/2025 Dated 09.06.2025, would be relevant, the same therefore, are extracted hereunder to be adhered to by the First Appellate Authority while deciding the restored appeal in the set aside appellate proceedings

Showing 1–20 of 83 · Page 1 of 5

21
Section 69C19
Survey u/s 133A17

ASHOK KUMAR WADHWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 118/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.117 &118/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani, Ujwal Udyog, Sinodha, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aahpw1400B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

purchased from the aforesaid parties. This fact is also supported by 9 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Raipur ITA Nos.117 &118/RPR/2024 the statement of bogus supplier parties who have categorically admitted that they did not own any stock or godown. 6.1 Legal position with regard to establishing 'Burden of Proof': The term 'Burden of Proof

ASHOK KUMAR WADHWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 117/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.117 &118/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani, Ujwal Udyog, Sinodha, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aahpw1400B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

purchased from the aforesaid parties. This fact is also supported by 9 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Raipur ITA Nos.117 &118/RPR/2024 the statement of bogus supplier parties who have categorically admitted that they did not own any stock or godown. 6.1 Legal position with regard to establishing 'Burden of Proof': The term 'Burden of Proof

VIJAY KUMAR CHHATTANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 120/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.120/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vijay Kumar Chhattani, S.S.D. Agro Tech Building, Village Tulsi, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pan: Afapc4410R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133A

purchase of goods. Their only work was to provide bogus bills to rice traders and millers. Therefore, it is the onus on the part of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to conduct specific enquiry in the case of the assessee to find out whether any legitimate taxes that was to be paid to the Department remains unpaid or whether

SATISH KUMAR AGRAWAL, BHILAI,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

ITA 145/RPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur13 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.145/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Satish Kumar Agrawal 3B, Heav Industrial Area, Hathkhoj, Bhilai, Dist. Durg-490 026 (C.G.) Pan: Adqpa1785K

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68Section 69C

justice. 3) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC is not justified in confirming action of the ld. Assessing Officer making the addition of Rs.1,80,84,701/- u/s.69C of the Act by treating genuine purchases as unexplained expenditure in the nature of bogus

SHANTI PARBOILING INDUSTRIES,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 99/RPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.99/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)

natural justice and is liable to be interfered with. 7. That without prejudice to afore-mentioned grounds, the quantum of addition sustained by the Ld. CIT (A) is arbitrary and excessive under the facts and circumstances of the case and also, there is no justification for the Ld. CIT(A) to sustain the disallowance of 25% of alleged bogus purchase

ARDENT STEELS PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 337/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 337/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2020-21)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

bogus company. Based on such evidences which were with the Ld. PCIT which were never provided to the assessee to rebut on the same to dislodge such observations of the Ld. PCIT, the assessee furnished copy of Ledger Account of M/s B B Medicare Pvt Ltd., Master Data from the website of MCA (Ministry of Corporate Affairs) showing that

INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAIPUR vs. RAHUL KATHURIA, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 151/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.151 & 152/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer/Income Tax Officer-3(1) Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148

Bogus Long term capital gain (LTCG)/Loss. ……. The purchase and sale transactions were carried through registered broker and through demat accounts but the assessee cannot escape from the onus of proving the transaction to be genuine. It is a fact that the assessee has purchased and the sold i.e. traded the scrip of Oasis Tradelink in order to claim

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. RAHUL KATHURIA, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 152/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.151 & 152/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer/Income Tax Officer-3(1) Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148

Bogus Long term capital gain (LTCG)/Loss. ……. The purchase and sale transactions were carried through registered broker and through demat accounts but the assessee cannot escape from the onus of proving the transaction to be genuine. It is a fact that the assessee has purchased and the sold i.e. traded the scrip of Oasis Tradelink in order to claim

SHIV TRADING CO., RAIGARH,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 101/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.101/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shiv Trading Co. Saranggarh Road, Chhatamuda Chowk, Raigarh-496 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aaqfs3990K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Nfac, Delhi. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pendse, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

bogus purchases could have been disallowed and not the entire claim of Rs.26,88,000/-. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in Law, having been passed in a mechanical manner without following the principles of natural justice

CHAITANYA SOLVEX PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 250/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 250 & 251/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Chaitanya Solvex Private Limited 58, Gandhi Chowk, Neora, Raipur (C.G.)-493 114 Pan : Aaacc9874F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

natural justice and the requirements of law. 2. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.28,99,318/-, being 25% of Rs.1,15,97,275/-, made by AO on account of alleged bogus purchase

CHAITANYA SOLVEX PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 251/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 250 & 251/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Chaitanya Solvex Private Limited 58, Gandhi Chowk, Neora, Raipur (C.G.)-493 114 Pan : Aaacc9874F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

natural justice and the requirements of law. 2. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.28,99,318/-, being 25% of Rs.1,15,97,275/-, made by AO on account of alleged bogus purchase

AGRAWAL INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, RAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 11/RPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.10 & 11/Rpr/2020 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2014-2015) Agrawal Infrabuild Private Limited, Vs Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Raipur 1St Floor, V.R.Plaza, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aafca 6636 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Nema & Gagan Tiwari, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 153A(1)Section 68

natural justice is void ab-initio. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the order of the A.O. wherein the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in making addition of Rs.6,40,50,000/- on account of share application money u/s 68. The addition made by the A.O. and sustained

AGRAWAL INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, RAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 10/RPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.10 & 11/Rpr/2020 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2014-2015) Agrawal Infrabuild Private Limited, Vs Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Raipur 1St Floor, V.R.Plaza, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aafca 6636 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Nema & Gagan Tiwari, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 153A(1)Section 68

natural justice is void ab-initio. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the order of the A.O. wherein the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in making addition of Rs.6,40,50,000/- on account of share application money u/s 68. The addition made by the A.O. and sustained

DCIT-1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI vs. VIJAYA DESHLAHRA, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

ITA 94/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 148Section 68

purchase and sale of shares. 8 ITA.Nos.92-94/RPR/2025 COs No.08-10/RPR/2025 10. Thus, considering the findings of the Directorate of Investigation in relation to the inquiries conducted in the case of assessee, brokers, operators, entry providers and the nature of transaction entered into by the assessee, of Rs. 2,08,33,750/- is held as non-genuine. Resultantly

DCIT-1(1), BHILAI vs. VIJAYA DESHLAHRA, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

ITA 92/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 148Section 68

purchase and sale of shares. 8 ITA.Nos.92-94/RPR/2025 COs No.08-10/RPR/2025 10. Thus, considering the findings of the Directorate of Investigation in relation to the inquiries conducted in the case of assessee, brokers, operators, entry providers and the nature of transaction entered into by the assessee, of Rs. 2,08,33,750/- is held as non-genuine. Resultantly

DCIT-1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI vs. VIJAYA DESHLAHRA, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

ITA 93/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 148Section 68

purchase and sale of shares. 8 ITA.Nos.92-94/RPR/2025 COs No.08-10/RPR/2025 10. Thus, considering the findings of the Directorate of Investigation in relation to the inquiries conducted in the case of assessee, brokers, operators, entry providers and the nature of transaction entered into by the assessee, of Rs. 2,08,33,750/- is held as non-genuine. Resultantly

HANUMANT INGOTS PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Accordingly the same is also allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 347/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 346 & 347/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

purchase remains unexplained at the end of the assessee. 4.1 In the instant case the assessee company has failed to furnish any details or explanation with respect to unexplained cash credit in his books of accounts failed to explain the bogus sales made by him during the year under consideration and hence required to be taxed

HANUMANT INGOTS PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Accordingly the same is also allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 346/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 346 & 347/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

purchase remains unexplained at the end of the assessee. 4.1 In the instant case the assessee company has failed to furnish any details or explanation with respect to unexplained cash credit in his books of accounts failed to explain the bogus sales made by him during the year under consideration and hence required to be taxed

SHREE SHANTI INDUSTRIES,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 545/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 545/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shree Shanti Industries Heerapur, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Abcfs3156Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

natural justice by not allowing proper opportunity of being heard. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in making an addition of Rs.7,12,560/-on account of alleged bogus purchases