https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287277 Where alleged bogus purchases are unsupported by credible delivery and transportation evidence, and the suppliers are identified as accommodation bill providers, the addition may be confined to the profit element embedded in those purchases if the corresponding sales are accepted. The assessee did not press the reopening challenge, so no finding was required on that issue. On merits, the Tribunal followed its earlier-year approach and sustained an estimated disallowance of 12.5% of the disputed purchases, rather than deleting the addition in full. The assessee's challenge therefore failed on merits. en-us Wed, 03 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Apr 2020 09:56:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287277 Where alleged bogus purchases are unsupported by credible delivery and transportation evidence, and the suppliers are identified as accommodation bill providers, the addition may be confined to the profit element embedded in those purchases if the corresponding sales are accepted. The assessee did not press the reopening challenge, so no finding was required on that issue. On merits, the Tribunal followed its earlier-year approach and sustained an estimated disallowance of 12.5% of the disputed purchases, rather than deleting the addition in full. The assessee's challenge therefore failed on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287277