<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (11) TMI 20 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267211</link>
    <description>The First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld the disallowance of purchases totaling Rs. 3.09 Crores due to non-verifiability, citing lack of evidence and discrepancies. The FAA estimated net profit at 11% on turnover, despite the appellant&#039;s objections, considering financial performance. Failure to produce parties to prove purchase genuineness was crucial, impacting the assessment outcome. The FAA&#039;s application of a uniform net profit rate on all purchases was partially reversed by the tribunal, limiting disallowance to 11% of doubtful purchases or peak investment. The judgment emphasized verification, profit estimation, and burden of proof on the assessee in establishing transaction authenticity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2015 07:47:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=403857" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 20 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267211</link>
      <description>The First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld the disallowance of purchases totaling Rs. 3.09 Crores due to non-verifiability, citing lack of evidence and discrepancies. The FAA estimated net profit at 11% on turnover, despite the appellant&#039;s objections, considering financial performance. Failure to produce parties to prove purchase genuineness was crucial, impacting the assessment outcome. The FAA&#039;s application of a uniform net profit rate on all purchases was partially reversed by the tribunal, limiting disallowance to 11% of doubtful purchases or peak investment. The judgment emphasized verification, profit estimation, and burden of proof on the assessee in establishing transaction authenticity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267211</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>