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.

8 results for “bogus purchases”+ Revision u/s 263clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi77Mumbai64Jaipur45Kolkata43Rajkot30Ahmedabad30Bangalore28Chandigarh23Chennai23Agra19Indore18Lucknow14Surat14Pune9Nagpur8Raipur8Amritsar4Jodhpur3Patna3Guwahati3Ranchi2Dehradun2Hyderabad2Jabalpur1Cuttack1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 26335Section 143(3)11Section 14710Section 6810Revision u/s 2635Addition to Income4Section 271(1)(c)3Section 250(4)2Section 143(2)2Business Income

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR PATEL,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

ITA 212/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 212/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 68

bogus was the subject matter of appeal. Ld. AR further argued that, as per doctrine of merger, according to settled law the impugned addition which is subject matter of appeal cannot be the basis for exercising the revisionary powers u/s 263 of the I T Act. 17 Shri Vijay Kumar Patel, Raipur vs PCIT, Raipur-1 Accordingly, revision of assessment

2
Natural Justice2

MADANLAL LODHA,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 32/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No: Ita 32/Rpr/2022 (Assessment Years:2017-18) Madanlal Lodha, V Pr. Commissioner Of Income Ta, C/O M/S Prakash Trading Comp. S Raipur-(I) Shop No. 109 & 110, Textile Market, Pandri, Raipur, (C.G.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : Shri R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By : Shri S.K. Meena, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03-08-2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20-10-2023

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 96

revision order is illegal, arbitrary, and not sustainable. 2 ii). Ld. Pr. CIT erred in setting aside the issue of taxability of capital gain arising on compulsory acquisition of land of appellant. The capital gain is not liable to tax and Ld. PCIT failed to appreciate the evidence filed and the correct position of law. iii). The appellant reserves

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

u/s 263, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT, for raising the following grounds of appeal: 1. (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the exercise of revisionary powers by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (“Ld. CIT’) is not in accordance with provisions of section 263 of the Income

SPECTRUM INFONET PVT. LTD.,RAIGARH vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 33/RPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 33 & 34/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Spectrum Infonet Private Limited 601, South Gajanandpuram Colony, Kotra Road, Raigarh (C.G.)-496001 Pan : Aalcs5656E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Bhopal ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263

purchase of the investment which was sold; copy of contract note and bills raised etc. were filed by the assessee company during the course of scrutiny proceeding though the same were specifically asked for by the A.O vide his notice(s) u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 15.06.2017, 07.09.2017 and 03.10.2017. Also, it was observed

SPECTRUM INFONET PVT. LTD.,RAIGARH vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 34/RPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 33 & 34/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Spectrum Infonet Private Limited 601, South Gajanandpuram Colony, Kotra Road, Raigarh (C.G.)-496001 Pan : Aalcs5656E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Bhopal ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263

purchase of the investment which was sold; copy of contract note and bills raised etc. were filed by the assessee company during the course of scrutiny proceeding though the same were specifically asked for by the A.O vide his notice(s) u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 15.06.2017, 07.09.2017 and 03.10.2017. Also, it was observed

FAKIR CHAND AGRAWAL,BILASPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

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

ITA 61/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 61/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Fakir Chand Agrawal Plot No. 22 & 23, Anjani Rani Durgavati, Industrial Area, Pendra Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) Pan : Aezpa7821C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur-1. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 4Section 69C

u/s 263 is illegal inasmuch as same has been passed without appreciating the fact that appellant has already filed declaration under DTVSV, 2020 in respect of the issue raised by Ld. Pr. CIT. Provisions of sec. 263 could not have been invoked. 3. Without prejudice to above grounds, the revision order passed by ld. Pr. CIT is illegal

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S R.R. INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR

ITA 144/RPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 144/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. R.R. Industrial Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd., Station Road, Telghani Naka, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaecr4291B ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit M. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 68

bogus shareholders, then it is for 27 ACIT-1(1),Raipur Vs. M/s. R. R. Industrial Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd. the Income Tax Officer to proceed by reopening the assessment of such shareholders and assess them to tax in accordance with law, and the revenue was not entitled to add the same to the assessee’s income as unexplained cash

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), RAIPUR vs. MESERS ARYAN BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR

In the result, both appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed in terms of our observations

ITA 201/RPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar Singhania, CA, &For Respondent: Shri S.K.Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 250(4)Section 68

revised grounds of appeal vide letter dated 14.12.2022, which read as under:- 1. "Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,07,00,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act?" 2. "Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances