<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (11) TMI 816 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401061</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, limiting the addition to Rs. 48,85,485 instead of the proposed Rs. 3,05,34,283 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal ruled that the sales were genuine, and the assessee maintained proper records, leading to the adoption of a Gross Profit rate on unsubstantiated purchases from six creditors. The decision emphasized considering the profit element in transactions rather than adding the entire purchase amount as bogus income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2021 12:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628675" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 816 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401061</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, limiting the addition to Rs. 48,85,485 instead of the proposed Rs. 3,05,34,283 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal ruled that the sales were genuine, and the assessee maintained proper records, leading to the adoption of a Gross Profit rate on unsubstantiated purchases from six creditors. The decision emphasized considering the profit element in transactions rather than adding the entire purchase amount as bogus income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401061</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>