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.

6 results for “bogus purchases”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai833Delhi387Jaipur205Kolkata157Chennai131Ahmedabad127Bangalore92Chandigarh88Cochin57Hyderabad56Indore53Pune49Rajkot46Raipur45Surat42Nagpur35Guwahati28Allahabad26Agra24Jodhpur19Lucknow19Patna16Visakhapatnam11Cuttack8Amritsar8Ranchi6Jabalpur3Dehradun2Varanasi2Panaji2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)13Section 26310Section 153A6Addition to Income6Section 10(38)4Section 132(1)2Section 143(2)2Bogus/Accommodation Entry2Long Term Capital Gains

KARNI MANSION PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), JAMSHEDPUR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 344/RAN/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi15 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), where the appeal of the assessee was dismissed due to non-prosecution by upholding the order of the AO. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising various grounds. However, the primary contention of the assessee is that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be quashed.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

bogus share capital, unexplained investment in purchase of property and unexplained source of income respectively. 3. Aggrieved by the order

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

2
Revision u/s 2632
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

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

SRI KAMLESH KUMAR SINGH,DALTONGANJ vs. ACIT,CIR-1, RANCHI

ITA 53/RAN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 49/Ran/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Smt. Madhu Singh,...................................Appellant Hamidganj, Daltonganj-822101 [Pan: Bbjps0426B] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-1, Ranchi & I.T.A. Nos. 53 & 54/Ran/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Shri Kamlesh Kumar Singh,...................Appellant Hamidganj, Daltonganj-822101 [Pan: Afzps8288J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-1, Ranchi Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.K. Koley, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 22, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 7Th, 2023 1 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Smt. Madhu Singh & Ita Nos. 53 & 54/Ran/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Shri Kamlesh Kr. Singh

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 234A

unexplained money in the hands of Kamlesh Kumar Singh 4 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Smt. Madhu Singh & ITA Nos. 53 & 54/RAN/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Shri Kamlesh Kr. Singh and made a substantive addition under section 69A of the Act and for loan taken from her son, substantive addition of Rs.3,54,000/- made in the hands

ACIT, C.C.-1, RANCHI vs. M/S CHINTPURNI STEEL PVT. LTD.,, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 32/RAN/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 69A

bogus persons / entities as named in the assessment order. Hence the total amount of credit in the said current account was stood at Rs.34,13,13,634/- which is inclusive of cash deposits of Rs,7,20,46,000/- . These amounts were transferred to various ultimate beneficiaries through RTGS/Cheque 3 AY: 2013-14 M/s Chintpurni Steel

RAMA SHANKAR PRASAD ,RANCHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

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

ITA 115/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi22 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

bogus and accordingly by Page 2 of 6 I.T.A. No.: 115/RAN/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Rama Shankar Prasad. issuing notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 25.10.2017 called upon the assessee to furnish the details of claim u/s 10(38) of the Act and also to establish the credibility, genuineness and authenticity of the said transactions. Thereafter again