https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264512 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition for alleged suppressed sales, noting the lack of concrete evidence and reliance on surmises by the Assessing Officer. The acceptance of computerized books of accounts without primary documents was justified based on accurate record-keeping practices. The rejection of books of accounts by the AO was deemed insufficient, with the burden of proof incorrectly shifted onto the appellant. The CIT(A) adhered to principles of natural justice and thoroughly examined assessment records, ultimately dismissing the Revenue's appeals on 2nd September 2015. en-us Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264512 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition for alleged suppressed sales, noting the lack of concrete evidence and reliance on surmises by the Assessing Officer. The acceptance of computerized books of accounts without primary documents was justified based on accurate record-keeping practices. The rejection of books of accounts by the AO was deemed insufficient, with the burden of proof incorrectly shifted onto the appellant. The CIT(A) adhered to principles of natural justice and thoroughly examined assessment records, ultimately dismissing the Revenue's appeals on 2nd September 2015. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264512