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.

2 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 194clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi238Mumbai198Karnataka99Jaipur76Chandigarh52Kolkata45Calcutta35Ahmedabad27Raipur22Chennai22Allahabad19Guwahati16Pune13Surat13Lucknow9Cuttack5Hyderabad5Indore5Bangalore5Amritsar5Jodhpur4Telangana4Nagpur2Rajkot2Visakhapatnam2

Key Topics

Addition to Income2

M/S. PHARMA BIO SOLUTIONS,,CHINNAVUTAPALLI vs. THE, CIT(A),, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 114/VIZ/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.114/Viz/2016 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-2012) M/S Pharma Bio Solutions Vs. Income Tax Officer (Formerly Named As Ward-1(2) M/S Padmaja Laboratories Vijayawada Chinnavutapalli [Pan:Aakfp5523D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. B.V.S. Chalapathi Rao, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Smt. Suman Malik, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.11.2018

For Appellant: Shri. B.V.S. Chalapathi Rao, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 40Section 40A(3)

194 ITR 80 (1992) (P&H) The first appellate authority has considered the submissions of the assessee and called for the remand report and given an opportunity to the assessee to explain the reasons for payment in cash. After considering the remand report, the objections of the assessee for the remand report, the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The observations

SEERAM PADMANABHA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,,ELURU vs. ITO, WARD-1,, ELURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 468/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Nov 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.468/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-2014) M/S Seeram Padmanabha Vs. Income Tax Officer Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Ward-1 D.No.6A-2-6, Near Gandhi Statue Eluru Southern Street Eluru [Pan :Aaqcs9501F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suman Malik, DR
Section 68

194) (ii) Smt. Harshita Chordia Vs. ITO (298 ITR 249) (iii) ITAT Ahmedabad in ITO Vs. Sapna Land Developers (ITA No.2992/Ahd dated 28.12.2015 Thus, the Ld.CIT(A) held that the assessee failed to prove the nature and source of impugned credits, therefore confirmed the entire additions. The Ld.CIT(A) placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court