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.

3 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 234Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi85Mumbai81Bangalore49Jaipur25Allahabad21Agra15Ahmedabad13Hyderabad11Indore10Ranchi10Chennai7Chandigarh6Raipur6Kolkata5Lucknow4Jodhpur4Rajkot4Nagpur3Surat3Dehradun2Guwahati1Amritsar1Pune1

Key Topics

Section 1489Section 683Section 1473Addition to Income3Section 2502Section 234A2Section 1442Bogus Purchases2

M/S. SHASHVAT JEWELS PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3364/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No3364/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2007-08 M/S. Shashvat Jewels Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income-Tax, 6/1468, Shashvat House, Circle-2(1)(2) Surat Kansara Street, Mahidharpura, Surat 395003 Pan:Aajcs 9790D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143Section 148Section 68

bogus purchases of Rs.37,52,890. Accordingly, addition of Rs.1,87,645 [5% of Rs.37,52,890] is sustained as against addition of Rs. 37,52 890. In view of this, the addition of Rs.35,65,245 is deleted. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 to 5 of appeal of the assessee are partly allowed. 11. Ground No. 6: Relating to charging

SUNIL KUMAR MEHTA,DARIAPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 2(2)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the manner indicated above

ITA 265/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.265/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Sunik Kumar Mehta बनाम/ Ito, A – 24, Asthvinayak Complex, Vs. Ward- 2(2)(1), Dariapur, Ahmedabad - 380004 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Allpm1108P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Chirag Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/11/2025

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

bogus transactions amounting to Rs.89,53,637/- with M/s. Smart Art Graph Advertising Pvt. Ltd. On the basis of this information and after recording reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment, case of the assessee was reopened after following due procedure and notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. Subsequently, assessee was requested to furnish details/documentary

DESIGNER EXIM PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 1(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) M/S Designer Exim Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O., D-1203, Panchsheel Heights, Opp.- Ward 1(1)(2), Vs. Pizza Hut, Mahavir Nagar, Kandivali Surat. West, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400067 Pan No. Aabcd 4298 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 254(1)

purchases made by the appellant to the tune of Rs. 907039/- from M/s Sonali Enterprises is bogus and non- M/s Designer Exim P Ld. Vs ITO genuine. Reasons assigned by him are wrong and insufficient to support such conclusion. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals