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.

5 results for “bogus purchases”+ Set Off of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,085Delhi1,075Kolkata495Jaipur353Ahmedabad276Chennai274Surat162Bangalore161Pune144Chandigarh130Indore117Hyderabad114Nagpur75Rajkot67Cochin58Raipur58Calcutta50Guwahati47Lucknow46Visakhapatnam44Amritsar32Cuttack28Jodhpur24Patna15Allahabad14Karnataka10Telangana10Agra8Varanasi6Ranchi5SC4Dehradun4Panaji3Orissa2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 2637Section 153A7Section 143(3)5Section 685Section 41(1)4Addition to Income4Section 133(6)2Set Off of Losses2

DCIT CIR-3(1), JAMSHEDPUR vs. M/S YASH INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED , JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 155/RAN/2017[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Nov 2022

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

bogus Short Term Capital Loss to evade taxes by setting such losses against the actual gains, then such accommodation entry in the form of Short Term Capital Loss are provided by such entry operators/brokers Page 8 of 11 I.T.A. No.: 155/Ran/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Yash Infratech (P) Ltd. to the beneficiaries who want to reduce their tax liability

RASHMI SINGHANIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 208/RAN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.208/Ran/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Rashmi Singhania.…....……………… … ...........…………………………Appellant C/O. S. Singhania & Co. 7Th Floor, Room No.3, 2, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkata-700013. [Pan: Aswps1056N] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(4), Jamshedpur...........……………………...………..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri R. K. Singhania, Advocate,Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Chinmaya Aurangabadkar, Jcit, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing :March 24, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 30, 2021 Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 01.02.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur [Hereinafter As ‘Cit(A)’]. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 10(38)Section 69A

set off the aforesaid capital gain of Rs.17,72,000/- against the loss of Rs.21,71,801/- and has returned the net capital loss amounting to Rs.3,42,499/-. However, the Assessing Officer treated the long-term capital gains shown by the assessee of Rs.17,72,000/- as bogus and added the same into the income of the assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI vs. SHRI SUMIT RAMSISARIA, RANCHI

ITA 222/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

set, it is stated that the AO has allowed the appellant to claim the entire expenses on account of purchase of material, business expenses etc. When the total expenses claimed in the Profit & Loss account has been allowed to be claimed by the AO, there is no justification to assume that no such liability existed in the Balance Sheet

SHRI NAVNEET MODI,RANCHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 106/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.106/Ran/2019 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.53/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016 & 2013-2014) Shri Navneet Modi, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Ranchi Modi House, Kanke Dam Side Road, Kanke, Ranchi स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Actpm 1511 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Inderjeet Singh, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

loss account. Therefore, the High Court answered the substantial question of law in the negative and in favour of the assessee. The facts of the present case are similar those of the case of Vardhman Overseas Ltd. (supra). Therefore, it is abundantly clear that the provision of sec. 41(21) (a) are not applicable. No addition could be made

PADAM KUMAE JAIN,RANCHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 289/RAN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi08 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Ran/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Padam Kumar Jain Vs. Cit, Central, Cr Building, Beer Chand Patel Marg, Patna – 800001. Ratanlalsurajmal Compound, Main Road, Ranchi – 834001, Jharkhand "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abrpj 0001 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Chaudhury & Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

bogus expenses in form of incentive of sales given to aforesaid buyers in order to evade taxes. You are requested to show cause as to why expenses claimed under the head incentive on sales totaling amounting to Rs. 9,45,96,300/- should not be disallowed and added to the total income for the year under consideration. 2. On examination