https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196026 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the disallowance of purchases from hawala parties to 4.92% of the total amount. Despite the assessee's failure to conclusively prove the legitimacy of purchases, the existence of invoices and payments through banking channels indicated some transactional activity. The Tribunal agreed that the disallowance should only cover the profit element in the transactions, considering the uncontested sales turnover. Both the departmental appeal and Cross Objection were dismissed, emphasizing the importance of proving transaction genuineness and the CIT(A)'s discretion in limiting disallowances. en-us Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Nov 2017 06:54:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196026 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the disallowance of purchases from hawala parties to 4.92% of the total amount. Despite the assessee's failure to conclusively prove the legitimacy of purchases, the existence of invoices and payments through banking channels indicated some transactional activity. The Tribunal agreed that the disallowance should only cover the profit element in the transactions, considering the uncontested sales turnover. Both the departmental appeal and Cross Objection were dismissed, emphasizing the importance of proving transaction genuineness and the CIT(A)'s discretion in limiting disallowances. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196026