https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303561 The ITAT partly allowed the appeal, modifying the Ld. CIT(A)'s order by restricting the disallowance to 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. The ITAT considered the documentary evidence provided by the assessee but drew adverse inference due to the absence of suppliers. It noted that since sales were not doubted, a hundred percent disallowance was not justified. The ITAT referenced a jurisdictional High Court precedent and decided that the 12.5% disallowance, taking into account the declared gross profit rate, was appropriate in this case to address potential tax evasion concerns. en-us Mon, 05 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jul 2022 08:28:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303561 The ITAT partly allowed the appeal, modifying the Ld. CIT(A)'s order by restricting the disallowance to 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. The ITAT considered the documentary evidence provided by the assessee but drew adverse inference due to the absence of suppliers. It noted that since sales were not doubted, a hundred percent disallowance was not justified. The ITAT referenced a jurisdictional High Court precedent and decided that the 12.5% disallowance, taking into account the declared gross profit rate, was appropriate in this case to address potential tax evasion concerns. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303561