https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247391 Where stock records matched statutory records and no physical stock discrepancy, absence of some vendors and lack of direct proof of bogus circulation did not justify rejection of the books in toto; the Tribunal's estimate limiting disallowance on alleged bogus purchases to 10% was upheld. Separately, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) could not survive because the retrospective amendment by the Finance Act, 2008 applied from 01.04.2005; the lower authorities had overlooked that amended regime, and the disallowance was set aside. The Revenue's challenge failed, while the assessee obtained relief on the TDS-related cross objection. en-us Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 May 2014 08:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247391 Where stock records matched statutory records and no physical stock discrepancy, absence of some vendors and lack of direct proof of bogus circulation did not justify rejection of the books in toto; the Tribunal's estimate limiting disallowance on alleged bogus purchases to 10% was upheld. Separately, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) could not survive because the retrospective amendment by the Finance Act, 2008 applied from 01.04.2005; the lower authorities had overlooked that amended regime, and the disallowance was set aside. The Revenue's challenge failed, while the assessee obtained relief on the TDS-related cross objection. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247391