Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : ITO Vs Raman Kohli (ITAT Chandigarh)
Related Assessment Year : 2020-21
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
ITO Vs Raman Kohli (ITAT Chandigarh) Sales Accepted, Purchases Can’t Be Branded Bogus: ITAT Chandigarh Dismisses Revenue Appeals for AYs 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2020-21 and 2021-22, upholding the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) orders that deleted large additions on account of alleged non-genuine purchases. The Assessing Officer had disallowed purchases aggregating ₹10.15 crore (AY 2020-21) and ₹11.66 crore (AY 2021-22) mainly because certain suppliers were non-filers of returns, had no email IDs, or did not f...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Delhi ITAT Upholds Deletion of Penny Stock Additions; Mere Suspicion and Investigation Reports Cannot Replace Evidence Section 54F Exemption Allowed on Sale of Redeveloped Flat: ITAT Mumbai Section 28 Land Acquisition Interest Exempt as Enhanced Compensation: ITAT Delhi Bogus Purchase Addition Cannot Be Based on Suspicion Alone: ITAT Chennai Section 69 Addition Deleted as No Evidence Linked Joint Holder to Alleged On-Money: ITAT Mumbai View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031