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.

5 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 40(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai903Delhi518Jaipur198Chennai169Kolkata158Bangalore131Ahmedabad117Hyderabad91Chandigarh86Indore64Cochin57Surat57Amritsar54Rajkot53Raipur51Pune45Visakhapatnam41Guwahati36Allahabad30Nagpur23Agra22Lucknow21Jodhpur21Patna7Varanasi5Ranchi5Dehradun3Cuttack2Jabalpur2Panaji2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)13Section 26310Section 153A6Addition to Income5Section 1474Section 115B3Section 143(2)3Section 1483Section 692

M/S. SRIRAM POWER & STEEL PVT. LTD.,,RAMGARH vs. PR. CIT(C), PATNA, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 20/RAN/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi31 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

bogus share application money and share premium from the said two companies as per the facts available on the assessment record. According to Ld. PCIT, the AO has failed to examine the investment and issue of share capital and share premium and thus has not verified the identity, creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of the transactions which has rendered

M/S. SRIRAM POWER & STEEL PVT. LTD.,,RAMGARH vs. PR. CIT(C), PATNA, PATNA

Revision u/s 2632

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 21/RAN/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi31 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

bogus share application money and share premium from the said two companies as per the facts available on the assessment record. According to Ld. PCIT, the AO has failed to examine the investment and issue of share capital and share premium and thus has not verified the identity, creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of the transactions which has rendered

KULDIP SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 180/RAN/2025[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.180/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kuldip Singh…………………….……….……...................……….……Appellant The Avenue Vishnupuri Marg, Upper Burdwan Compound, Lalpur, Ranchi- 834001. [Pan: Agjps6921P] Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-1, Ranchi…...…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 10, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 06.03.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

40,80,800. The case was selected for scrutiny, and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, vide order dated 15.12.2016, accepting the returned income. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 of I.T.A. No.180/Ran/2025 the Act dated 22.11.2019, i.e., after the expiry of four years from

SHAH BROTHERS,CHAIBASA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 134/RAN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayshah Brothers, A.C.I.T., Thana Lane, Chaibasa-833201 Central Circle-1, Vs. (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aazfs 7498 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)

3 Shah Brothers Vs ACIT when the appellant's transactions were supported by proper documentary evidences which are required to be maintained in the ordinary course of business. As admitted by the Id. AO of the payee company, the gross contractual receipts for FY 2012-13 were to the or.der of Rs.6716.69 lacs whereas the amount billed to the appellant

RANJIT PRASAD SAHU,BOKARO vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HAZARIBAGH

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 312/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Ranjit Prasad Sahu, A.C.I.T., Hosir, P.O. Lalpania, Dist.- Hazaribagh. Vs. Bokaro-829149 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Akkpk 9351 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 271ASection 69Section 69A

Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide the impugned order, confirmed the order of Assessing Officer on the ground that, though, the appellant had given the details of monthwise cash deposits in different bank accounts made during