<?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>2016 (8) TMI 1154 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190164</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the First Appellate Authority&#039;s decision to delete the addition made under section 69C of the Income-tax Act, as the assessee proved the genuineness of purchases. The Tribunal also agreed with estimating the profit element in alleged bogus purchases, directing a 10% disallowance. Appeals by both the Assessing Officer and the assessee for all assessment years were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2017 09:40:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=457821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1154 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190164</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the First Appellate Authority&#039;s decision to delete the addition made under section 69C of the Income-tax Act, as the assessee proved the genuineness of purchases. The Tribunal also agreed with estimating the profit element in alleged bogus purchases, directing a 10% disallowance. Appeals by both the Assessing Officer and the assessee for all assessment years were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190164</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>