https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342133 Reopening under sections 147 and 148 was upheld because the return had been processed only under section 143(1), no earlier opinion existed, and tangible information from the Investigation Wing linked the assessee to bogus purchase bills. The assessee also failed to prove the genuineness of purchases from alleged hawala concerns, as it did not produce the suppliers or establish movement of goods, and the burden of proof remained undischarged. Rejection of books was sustained, and the Commissioner (Appeals)' estimate of 9% addition on the impugned purchases was found reasonable and left undisturbed. en-us Tue, 25 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Apr 2017 06:55:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342133 Reopening under sections 147 and 148 was upheld because the return had been processed only under section 143(1), no earlier opinion existed, and tangible information from the Investigation Wing linked the assessee to bogus purchase bills. The assessee also failed to prove the genuineness of purchases from alleged hawala concerns, as it did not produce the suppliers or establish movement of goods, and the burden of proof remained undischarged. Rejection of books was sustained, and the Commissioner (Appeals)' estimate of 9% addition on the impugned purchases was found reasonable and left undisturbed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342133