https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349076 The appeal was made against an assessment order for AY 2009-10, where the AO added alleged bogus purchases to the total income of the assessee, based on bills from entities listed as hawala dealers by the sales-tax department. The CIT(A) found the purchases genuine, and the ITAT directed the AO to estimate gross profit at 12.5% on the alleged bogus purchases. The burden of proof was debated, with the Revenue emphasizing the assessee's high burden and lack of cross-examined parties. The ITAT stressed the importance of proper documentation over the presence of parties in establishing the genuineness of transactions. en-us Mon, 25 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Oct 2017 06:53:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349076 The appeal was made against an assessment order for AY 2009-10, where the AO added alleged bogus purchases to the total income of the assessee, based on bills from entities listed as hawala dealers by the sales-tax department. The CIT(A) found the purchases genuine, and the ITAT directed the AO to estimate gross profit at 12.5% on the alleged bogus purchases. The burden of proof was debated, with the Revenue emphasizing the assessee's high burden and lack of cross-examined parties. The ITAT stressed the importance of proper documentation over the presence of parties in establishing the genuineness of transactions. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 25 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349076