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.

416 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 10(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,849Delhi2,563Kolkata854Jaipur648Ahmedabad575Chennai550Surat416Pune392Bangalore372Chandigarh271Hyderabad240Indore210Raipur157Rajkot133Karnataka126Amritsar110Nagpur108Visakhapatnam84Lucknow76Guwahati67Cuttack66Cochin65Calcutta53Agra48Jodhpur40Allahabad34Patna31Ranchi26Telangana18Dehradun16Jabalpur13Varanasi7SC6Panaji5Orissa2Gauhati2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Bombay1Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Addition to Income91Section 143(3)78Section 14865Section 14758Section 271(1)(c)44Bogus Purchases44Section 6827Section 143(2)20Disallowance20

MURTUJA HUSAINBHAI HIRANI,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, , NAVSARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 196/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.196/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Murtuja Hussainbhai Hirani, Vs. The Ito, Ward-3, Prop. Of R. K. Bullion, Navsari Shop No.5, Pranav Chamber Madhumati, Navsari – 396445, Gujarat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aciph3680D Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 09/06/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 26/06/2023

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

bogus. The Ld. Counsel further stated that assessee made an agreement for cash purchases of the gold from various customers, since the assessee is trading in gold items, therefore he made minor cash purchases, which is only 4% of the total purchases hence the amount of cash purchase is very insignificant. Besides, the assessee made purchases in the course

Showing 1–20 of 416 · Page 1 of 21

...
Survey u/s 133A19
Section 26317
Reopening of Assessment17

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot

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

Section 254(1)

section 145 of the Act as recorded above that no submission was made by either of the parties on this ground as well. During assessment the assessing officer 18 held that the purchase shown by assessee in the books of account is bogus. Mere filing evidence in support of purchase and showing payments through account payee cheque cannot