https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434892 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, ruling that the Revenue's addition of Rs. 1,35,43,034 as unexplained income was unwarranted. The Tribunal found no discrepancies in the appellant's statutory records, rejected the Revenue's calculation of bogus sales as lacking evidence, and deemed the rejection of certain sales as unexplained income unjustified. The Tribunal emphasized the need for substantial evidence before categorizing sales as bogus and concluded that the cash deposits in the bank represented legitimate sales. Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the Revenue's actions contradictory and legally flawed, leading to the allowance of the appellant's appeal. en-us Tue, 31 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Apr 2026 18:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434892 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, ruling that the Revenue's addition of Rs. 1,35,43,034 as unexplained income was unwarranted. The Tribunal found no discrepancies in the appellant's statutory records, rejected the Revenue's calculation of bogus sales as lacking evidence, and deemed the rejection of certain sales as unexplained income unjustified. The Tribunal emphasized the need for substantial evidence before categorizing sales as bogus and concluded that the cash deposits in the bank represented legitimate sales. Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the Revenue's actions contradictory and legally flawed, leading to the allowance of the appellant's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434892