https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751800 ITAT Mumbai held that when both suppliers are allegedly bogus, comparing rates between them is inappropriate as both transactions are tainted. The CIT-A's approach of calculating additions based on rate differences between bogus suppliers was rejected. The tribunal noted that without genuine purchase transactions for comparison, precedents with varying addition rates (1%-12.5%) couldn't be applied blindly. Following the assessee's earlier years where CIT-A restricted additions to 3% of bogus purchases without revenue dispute, the tribunal found it reasonable to maintain the same 3% addition rate. The assessee's appeal was partly allowed. en-us Tue, 23 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Apr 2024 15:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751800 ITAT Mumbai held that when both suppliers are allegedly bogus, comparing rates between them is inappropriate as both transactions are tainted. The CIT-A's approach of calculating additions based on rate differences between bogus suppliers was rejected. The tribunal noted that without genuine purchase transactions for comparison, precedents with varying addition rates (1%-12.5%) couldn't be applied blindly. Following the assessee's earlier years where CIT-A restricted additions to 3% of bogus purchases without revenue dispute, the tribunal found it reasonable to maintain the same 3% addition rate. The assessee's appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751800