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”+ Section 147clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,611Delhi1,087Kolkata375Jaipur363Surat302Ahmedabad301Bangalore173Chennai160Chandigarh140Pune139Hyderabad101Karnataka101Indore81Amritsar72Rajkot72Raipur71Cochin59Nagpur55Guwahati53Calcutta49Lucknow33Patna30Agra25Jodhpur24Visakhapatnam23Allahabad18Ranchi8Jabalpur6Telangana5Dehradun5Cuttack3Orissa2SC2Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 1486Addition to Income4Section 13(1)(a)3Section 1083Section 13(1)(b)2Section 1472Section 142(1)2

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s. Meghadoot Drillers,

ITTA/473/2011HC Telangana31 Jan 2012
Section 133ASection 139Section 145(3)Section 147

purchases from the alleged three parties on theoretical platform ignoring the fact that the books of accounts of the assessee were rejected u/s 145(3) and the assessee has accepted the discrepencies during the survey operation u/s. 133A and has surrendered a sum of Rs. 57,00,000/- in assessment year 2004-05 and Rs. 20,00,000/- in assessment

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee

ITTA/413/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

- Suresh Kumar Sheetlani
For Appellant:
For Respondent: - Income Tax Officer-1 (3)
Section 133Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 282

bogus and unexplained income of the assessee from undisclosed sources vide assessment order dated 5th December, 2006 under Sections 144 and 147 of the Act. 7. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee had filed an appeal before the first appellate authority. The first appellant authority vide order dated 9th September, 2009 cancelled the said assessment order, declaring the same

The Commissioner of Income Tax -III vs. Sri T.C. Reddy

The appeal stands dismissed

ITTA/577/2011HC Telangana28 Feb 2012

purchaser M/s MEIPL was going to develop th land relating to 12 partners. Therefore, the land in pieces was brought by assessee company. It is not a case of the department that in lieu of cheques any cash was withdrawn from the bank and the same has been returned to the assessee. The general statement recorded of the Director that

The Commissioner of Income -Tax - III, vs. Shri Taher Ali

ITTA/322/2008HC Telangana04 Apr 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 108Section 13(1)(a)Section 13(1)(b)Section 13(1)(e)

bogus complaint dated 12.10.1990 to B.M.C. authorities as defendant no.2 had filed affidavit dated 10.9.1990 in favour of one of the tenants, Smt. Vasanti B. Palan in Suit (ST) 647 of 1990. Defendant no.2, by his Advocates' letter dated 28.10.1990 had placed various facts on record. On 8.11.1990, B.M.C. authorities issued notice under section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation

M/S VAIBHAV vs. JOINT COMM. OF INCOME TAX RANGE 3 HYD

Appeal is allowed and the judgments and decrees passed by the

ITTA/58/2002HC Telangana14 Sept 2022

Bench: The Learned Trial Court) Was Allowed & The Judgment & Decree Dated 12.12.2000, Passed By Learned Senior Sub Judge, Kullu Was Set-Aside. (Parties Shall Hereinafter Be Referred To In

For Appellant: Mr. Bimal Gupta, Sr. Advocate with

bogus, as she never paid the 14 consideration for the sale though she admitted the execution of the sale deed before the Registrar. Her story that she was ignorant of the nature of the transaction, it was held, cannot be accepted as she had admitted the execution of the sale deed before the Registrar. 11. A Division Bench of this