https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423525 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete part of the addition of bogus purchases, emphasizing the importance of proving the genuineness of transactions and following legal precedents in determining the income tax liability. The appellant, an Income Tax Officer, failed to prove the purchases' genuineness, leading to the addition of the entire amount of bogus purchases. Despite the Revenue's contention, the Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s decision legally sound, as the AO had not conducted a proper enquiry and relied on adhoc additions based on information from the Sales Tax Department. en-us Fri, 27 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jun 2022 08:14:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423525 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete part of the addition of bogus purchases, emphasizing the importance of proving the genuineness of transactions and following legal precedents in determining the income tax liability. The appellant, an Income Tax Officer, failed to prove the purchases' genuineness, leading to the addition of the entire amount of bogus purchases. Despite the Revenue's contention, the Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s decision legally sound, as the AO had not conducted a proper enquiry and relied on adhoc additions based on information from the Sales Tax Department. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423525