<?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>Dispute Over Bogus Purchases: Pr. CIT Challenges AO&#039;s 1.6% Income Addition u/s 263, Suggests Higher Rate.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=58985</link>
    <description>Revision u/s 263 - estimation of income on bogus purchases - Keeping in view the applicable VAT rate, Ld. AO estimated a further addition of 1.6% against these purchases. - Merely because Ld. Pr. CIT held a view that the estimation should have been at higher rates or entire purchase should have been disallowed, the same would not make the order erroneous - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2021 15:54:34 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2021 15:54:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=651161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Dispute Over Bogus Purchases: Pr. CIT Challenges AO&#039;s 1.6% Income Addition u/s 263, Suggests Higher Rate.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=58985</link>
      <description>Revision u/s 263 - estimation of income on bogus purchases - Keeping in view the applicable VAT rate, Ld. AO estimated a further addition of 1.6% against these purchases. - Merely because Ld. Pr. CIT held a view that the estimation should have been at higher rates or entire purchase should have been disallowed, the same would not make the order erroneous - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2021 15:54:34 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=58985</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>