https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368832 The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeals for some years due to low tax effect. For other years, it found Assessing Officer's disallowance lacked evidence, deeming CIT(A)'s 25% profit estimation excessive. Relying on a similar case, the Tribunal directed limiting disallowance to 3% based on evidence. Emphasizing the need for concrete proof, the Tribunal balanced addressing irregularities while ensuring fair profit assessment from purchases. The decision highlighted the importance of factual basis for disallowances and rejected treating purchases as non-genuine without substantial evidence. en-us Wed, 10 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Oct 2018 14:15:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368832 The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeals for some years due to low tax effect. For other years, it found Assessing Officer's disallowance lacked evidence, deeming CIT(A)'s 25% profit estimation excessive. Relying on a similar case, the Tribunal directed limiting disallowance to 3% based on evidence. Emphasizing the need for concrete proof, the Tribunal balanced addressing irregularities while ensuring fair profit assessment from purchases. The decision highlighted the importance of factual basis for disallowances and rejected treating purchases as non-genuine without substantial evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368832