https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330675 The tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, dismissing the appeal of the AO. It emphasized the importance of due process, cross-examination opportunities, and ensuring additions to income are based on valid evidence and legal provisions. The tribunal held that disallowance of purchases as bogus could not be entirely sustained, rejected the addition to income based on estimated GP ratio, emphasized principles of natural justice regarding cross-examination, and clarified that Section 69C was wrongly applied as the expenditure sources were explained by the assessee. en-us Fri, 22 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Aug 2016 13:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330675 The tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, dismissing the appeal of the AO. It emphasized the importance of due process, cross-examination opportunities, and ensuring additions to income are based on valid evidence and legal provisions. The tribunal held that disallowance of purchases as bogus could not be entirely sustained, rejected the addition to income based on estimated GP ratio, emphasized principles of natural justice regarding cross-examination, and clarified that Section 69C was wrongly applied as the expenditure sources were explained by the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330675