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.

59 results for “condonation of delay”+ Bogus Purchasesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai441Kolkata273Chennai173Delhi134Karnataka100Ahmedabad79Jaipur66Surat59Bangalore46Calcutta42Amritsar35Chandigarh26Pune25Hyderabad21Raipur19Nagpur18Lucknow16Indore14Cuttack13Rajkot10Visakhapatnam9Varanasi5Jodhpur4Patna4Agra3Dehradun3Allahabad3Telangana3Jabalpur2Guwahati1Cochin1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)84Section 143(3)48Addition to Income46Section 14845Section 14744Limitation/Time-bar26Condonation of Delay18Penalty18Section 254(1)

PARAG NARESHBHAI MEHTA PROP. OF DEEKSHA TRADING ,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(3)(8), , SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 169/SRT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT, Surat and Ahmedabad. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee states before the Bench that in the case of M/s. Sonu Dharmichand Bafna (in ITA No.167/SRT/2021

SONU DHARMICHAND BAFNA PROP. OF BRIGHT DIAMONDS,SURATY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD- 2(3)(8), SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 167/SRT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Showing 1–20 of 59 · Page 1 of 3

14
Reopening of Assessment14
Bogus Purchases14
Section 26310
Section 143(3)

bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT, Surat and Ahmedabad. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee states before the Bench that in the case of M/s. Sonu Dharmichand Bafna (in ITA No.167/SRT/2021

ITO, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT vs. SHRI PARAG NARESHBHAI MEHTA, SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 65/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT, Surat and Ahmedabad. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee states before the Bench that in the case of M/s. Sonu Dharmichand Bafna (in ITA No.167/SRT/2021

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(3)(8), SURAT vs. SHRI SONU DHARMICHAND BAFNA,, SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 48/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT, Surat and Ahmedabad. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee states before the Bench that in the case of M/s. Sonu Dharmichand Bafna (in ITA No.167/SRT/2021

THE ITO, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT vs. SHRI VRAJENDRA JAGJIVANDAS THAKKAR,, SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 62/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT, Surat and Ahmedabad. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee states before the Bench that in the case of M/s. Sonu Dharmichand Bafna (in ITA No.167/SRT/2021

MAYUR ASHESHBHAI JOSHI PROP. SHRUSHTI ENTERPRISE,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, - 2(3)(8), SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 170/SRT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT, Surat and Ahmedabad. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee states before the Bench that in the case of M/s. Sonu Dharmichand Bafna (in ITA No.167/SRT/2021

ITO, WARD -2(3)(8), SURAT vs. SHRI MAYUR ASHESHBHAI JOSHI, SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 66/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT, Surat and Ahmedabad. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee states before the Bench that in the case of M/s. Sonu Dharmichand Bafna (in ITA No.167/SRT/2021

VRAJENDRA JAGJIVANDAS THAKKAR PROP. OF ADITI EXPORTS,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD- 2(3)(8), SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 168/SRT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)

bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT, Surat and Ahmedabad. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee states before the Bench that in the case of M/s. Sonu Dharmichand Bafna (in ITA No.167/SRT/2021

ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), SURAT vs. SHRI RAVJIBHAI BECHARBHAI DHAMELIYA, SURAT

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 122/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

condone the delay in filing both these appeals and both these appeals, that is, (appeal by Revenue and Appeal by assessee) are admitted for hearing on merit. 4. Since, the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical; therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake

SHRI RAVJIBHAI BECHARBHAI DHAMELIYA,,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1(1), SURAT

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 239/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

condone the delay in filing both these appeals and both these appeals, that is, (appeal by Revenue and Appeal by assessee) are admitted for hearing on merit. 4. Since, the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical; therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(3), SURAT vs. SHRI RAVJIBHAI BECHARBHAI DHAMELIYA,, SURAT

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 304/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

condone the delay in filing both these appeals and both these appeals, that is, (appeal by Revenue and Appeal by assessee) are admitted for hearing on merit. 4. Since, the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical; therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake

SHRI RAVJIBHAI B DHAMELIYA,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 124/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

condone the delay in filing both these appeals and both these appeals, that is, (appeal by Revenue and Appeal by assessee) are admitted for hearing on merit. 4. Since, the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical; therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake

RAIYANI BROTHERS,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(4), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 8/SRT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.8/Srt/2021 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) M/S. Raiyani Brothers, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 9, Dumaswala Compound, Near Ward-3(3)(4), Surat, Aaykar Sargam Doctor House, Hira Baug, Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- Varachha Road, Surat – 395006. 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadfr0702K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2023

Section 143(3)Section 253(1)

condone the delay. 5. On merit, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee’s case relates to Rajendra Jain group cases wherein the Assessing Officer has made 100% addition on account of bogus purchases

ITO, WARD 3(3)(2), SURAT vs. JITENDRA AZAYSINGH BABEL, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue is partly allowed resultantly, the ground No

ITA 533/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

bogus purchases. 3. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend or withdraw any grounds of appeal.” 3. We observe from perusal of record that the appeal of the assessee is filed after 3 days of period of limitation. The ld. AR of the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay

JITENDRA AXAYSINGH BABEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(3)(2), SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue is partly allowed resultantly, the ground No

ITA 555/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

bogus purchases. 3. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend or withdraw any grounds of appeal.” 3. We observe from perusal of record that the appeal of the assessee is filed after 3 days of period of limitation. The ld. AR of the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay

SANJAYBHAI DAMJIBHAI GOLAKIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the appellant is allowed

ITA 951/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.951/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Sanjaybhai Damjibhai Golakiya, Vs. The Assessment Unit, D-74, Vithalnagar Society, Hirabaug, Income-Tax Department, Varachha Road, Surat - 395006 Jurisdictional Ao: The Ito, Ward – 3(3)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Alopg2048R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

Section 250Section 253(1)Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 6. The facts of the case in brief are that against returned income of Rs.4,96,230/-, the Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) assessed the total income at Rs.26,46,230/- by making addition of Rs.21,49,998/- on account of bogus purchases

SANTOSH SINGH HUKAM SINGH KARNAWAT,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT

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

ITA 655/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

bogus purchases on an estimated basis, applying industry profit ratio and following judicial principles. The ITAT clearly held that the purchases were in fact made, though not necessarily from the parties reflected in the books, and only the embedded profit element was taxable. Thus, the disallowance sustained was not based on any finding of actual concealment or furnishing of inaccurate

DIVYABEN PRAFULCHANDRA PARMAR,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 73/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.73/Srt/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Divyaben Prafulchand Parmar, Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(3)(1), 1-2, Harikrishna Niwas, B/H Braham Surat. Kumari Ashram, Bhatar Road, Surat – 395017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acbpp9559Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68Section 69

condone the delay in filing appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 9. Succinctly, the factual panorama of the case is that assessee before us is an Individual and filed her return of income on 04.03.2015, declaring total income of Rs.4,22,502/-. The assessee`s case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notice

VIMAL CHAND GOKHAROO,SURAT vs. ITO 3(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the appellant is allowed

ITA 40/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.40 To 42/Srt/2024 Assessment Years:(2011-12 To 2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vimal Chand Gokharoo, Vs. The Ito, 16Th Floor, D Wing, Trade World, Ward – 3(3)(1), Kamala Mills, Compound, Senapati Surat Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400013 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acupj0819L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Himashu Gandhi, Ca Respondent By Ms Jayshree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/04/2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

bogus purchases. On further appeal, the ITAT, Surat vide order dated 13.12.2022 sustained addition @ 6% of total purchase of Rs.9,12,55,927/-. Thereafter, penalty of Rs.15,48,509/- was levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, being minimum penalty @ 100% of the tax sought to be evaded. 4. Aggrieved by the order

VIMAL CHAND GOKHAROO,SURAT vs. ITO 3(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the appellant is allowed

ITA 41/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.40 To 42/Srt/2024 Assessment Years:(2011-12 To 2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vimal Chand Gokharoo, Vs. The Ito, 16Th Floor, D Wing, Trade World, Ward – 3(3)(1), Kamala Mills, Compound, Senapati Surat Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400013 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acupj0819L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Himashu Gandhi, Ca Respondent By Ms Jayshree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/04/2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

bogus purchases. On further appeal, the ITAT, Surat vide order dated 13.12.2022 sustained addition @ 6% of total purchase of Rs.9,12,55,927/-. Thereafter, penalty of Rs.15,48,509/- was levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, being minimum penalty @ 100% of the tax sought to be evaded. 4. Aggrieved by the order