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”+ Business Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,484Delhi2,602Kolkata998Jaipur624Ahmedabad573Chennai557Pune455Surat373Bangalore354Chandigarh281Hyderabad239Indore196Raipur173Rajkot121Karnataka118Amritsar114Nagpur112Visakhapatnam93Cuttack74Lucknow72Cochin71Guwahati69Calcutta55Agra49Jodhpur44Patna38Allahabad35Ranchi16Telangana14Dehradun14Jabalpur9Varanasi7Panaji6SC5Orissa2Bombay1Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)4Section 684Section 260A3Section 803Addition to Income3Section 143(2)2Depreciation2Penalty2Deduction2

BASIR AHMED SISODIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal is allowed

C.A. No.-006110-006110 - 2009Supreme Court24 Apr 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR

Section 143(2)Section 24(1)Section 260ASection 272(1)(c)Section 68

bogus   entries   effected   by   the   appellant/assessee. Resultantly,   the   penalty   proceedings   under   Section   271   were initiated by the Officer.  That order, however, has now been set aside by the appellate authority [CIT(A)] in the appeal preferred by the appellant/assessee, vide order dated 13.1.2011 with a finding that the appellant/assessee had not made any concealment of 10 income   or   furnished   inaccurate

M/S. KACHWALA GEMS vs. JOINT COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

C.A. No.-005809-005809 - 2006
Supreme Court
14 Dec 2006
For Appellant: "1. The assessee has not maintained and kept anyFor Respondent: Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur
Section 144Section 145(3)

business http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2 declared GP rate of 43.8% (even without considering the value of export incentives) in assessment year 1997-98." Thereafter the books of accounts of the assessee were rejected by the Assessing Officer and he resorted to best judgment assessment under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing

M/S.VIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

purchase and lease of cinematographic films held to be bogus Rs. 57,51,520.00 (ii) Reduction of claim of depreciation in respect of leasing vehicles from 40% to 20%. Rs. 10,28,462.00 (iii) Unexplained share application money added back as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 Rs. 19,16,000.00 (iv) Lease rentals of cinematographic films held

NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-001008-001008 - 2020Supreme Court03 Apr 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 148

purchase and sale. It is true, as the High Court has observed, that this information could have been acquired by the Income Tax Officer if he had exercised due diligence at the time of the original assessment itself. It does not appear, however,   that   the   attention   of   the   Income   Tax   Officer   was directed by anything before him to the fact

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

Appeals are hereby dismissed

C.A. No.-013771-013771 - 2015Supreme Court06 Dec 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Section 260ASection 80

purchased twenty five MV turbines on and around 08.07.1998 for the purpose of its eligible business. Assessee claimed depreciation on the said turbines at the rate of 25% on WDV basis. On perusal of the materials on record, assessing officer held that in view of the change in the law with regard to allowance of depreciation on the assets