https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390845 The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, directing the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding unsubstantiated purchases, wrong budgeted estimates in the Percentage of Completion Method (POCM), and sham transactions. The Tribunal upheld the genuineness of the revenue-sharing agreement and treated interest income as business income, dismissing the Revenue's appeals. The AO was directed to conduct further inquiries on unsubstantiated purchases, and the additions based on wrong estimates were deemed legally untenable. en-us Thu, 26 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jan 2020 08:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390845 The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, directing the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding unsubstantiated purchases, wrong budgeted estimates in the Percentage of Completion Method (POCM), and sham transactions. The Tribunal upheld the genuineness of the revenue-sharing agreement and treated interest income as business income, dismissing the Revenue's appeals. The AO was directed to conduct further inquiries on unsubstantiated purchases, and the additions based on wrong estimates were deemed legally untenable. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 26 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390845