<?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>2024 (10) TMI 695 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760096</link>
    <description>ITAT Mumbai upheld AO&#039;s 12.5% GP rate on bogus purchases, reversing CIT(A)&#039;s 10% restriction, as assessee failed to prove transaction genuineness despite providing purchase bills and bank statements. However, ITAT confirmed CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of section 68 addition for unexplained cash deposits, finding AO made no adverse findings regarding supporting documents and merely questioned cash withdrawal purpose when other payment modes existed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2024 08:38:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=772961" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 695 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760096</link>
      <description>ITAT Mumbai upheld AO&#039;s 12.5% GP rate on bogus purchases, reversing CIT(A)&#039;s 10% restriction, as assessee failed to prove transaction genuineness despite providing purchase bills and bank statements. However, ITAT confirmed CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of section 68 addition for unexplained cash deposits, finding AO made no adverse findings regarding supporting documents and merely questioned cash withdrawal purpose when other payment modes existed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760096</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>