https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169560 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee in both issues. In the first issue regarding suppression of purchases, the Tribunal emphasized the Department's burden to prove unaccounted purchases with concrete evidence, leading to the deletion of the addition. In the second issue concerning excess cash payments, the Tribunal found no violation of section 40A(3) as individual cash payments did not exceed the limit, overturning the order under section 263. The decisions highlighted the necessity of substantiated evidence and adherence to legal provisions in tax assessments, protecting taxpayer rights. en-us Thu, 10 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Mar 2015 15:02:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169560 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee in both issues. In the first issue regarding suppression of purchases, the Tribunal emphasized the Department's burden to prove unaccounted purchases with concrete evidence, leading to the deletion of the addition. In the second issue concerning excess cash payments, the Tribunal found no violation of section 40A(3) as individual cash payments did not exceed the limit, overturning the order under section 263. The decisions highlighted the necessity of substantiated evidence and adherence to legal provisions in tax assessments, protecting taxpayer rights. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 10 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169560