Search: bogus purchases | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

476 results for “bogus purchases”

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai9,060 Delhi3,259 Kolkata1,342 Chennai767 Ahmedabad739 Jaipur718 Pune636 Surat476 Bangalore432 Chandigarh344 Hyderabad279 Indore237 Raipur212 Rajkot150 Nagpur135 Amritsar129 Karnataka128 Visakhapatnam95 Lucknow92 Cuttack88 Guwahati79 Cochin73 Calcutta71 Agra63 Jodhpur59 Patna51 Ranchi40 Allahabad35 Dehradun25 Telangana24 Jabalpur15 Varanasi9 Panaji7 SC7 Orissa3 Gauhati2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Rajasthan1 Punjab & Haryana1 Bombay1

Key Topics

Addition to Income91 Section 143(3)73 Section 14862 Section 14754 Bogus Purchases48 Section 271(1)(c)45 Section 6831 Disallowance22 Section 26321

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT vs. SHRI NAVRATAN JAIN,, MUMBAI

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 200/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT vs. DILKHUSH BABEL, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 124/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Showing 1–20 of 476 · Page 1 of 24

...

Section 143(2)18

Reopening of Assessment18

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT vs. SHRI NAVRATAN JAIN,, MUMBAI

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 201/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

DILKHUSH BABEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 260/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

SHRI NARAYAN TULSIRAM SHARMA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 265/SRT/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT vs. DILKHUSH BABEL, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 123/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

DILKHUSH BABEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 261/SRT/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

DILKHUSH BABEL,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 538/SRT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT vs. SHRI NARAYAN LAL SHARMA, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 88/SRT/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT vs. ASHISH MOHAN MAHAWAR, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 122/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

DILKHUSH BABEL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 40/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

SHRI NAVRATAN SINGH JAIN,,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 258/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

SHRI NAVRATAN SINGH JAIN,,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 259/SRT/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

DILKHUSH BABEL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 41/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

SHRI NARAYAN LAL SHARMA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 19/SRT/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (3) (7), SURAT vs. DILKHUSH BABEL, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 1/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

ASHISH MOHAN MAHAWAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 42/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

SHRI NAVRATAN SINGH JAIN,,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 105/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT vs. DILKHUSH ANNRAJ BABEL, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 289/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income

SHRI NAVRATAN JAIN,,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT

In the result, four appeals of Revenue are partly allowed whereas four assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 106/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

bogus purchases and bogus sales. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should have treated the whole amount of these purchases as income