https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460801 Third-party sales-tax information indicating that suppliers were hawala operators, together with non-service of section 133(6) notices, supported an inference of unverifiable purchases, but the assessee had produced purchase bills, delivery challans and banking proof. On those facts, the purchases could not be disallowed in full merely on departmental information; instead, only the profit element embedded in the purchases was brought to tax. Consistent with similar cases, the addition for bogus purchases was restricted to 12.5% of the impugned purchases. en-us Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Feb 2025 13:31:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460801 Third-party sales-tax information indicating that suppliers were hawala operators, together with non-service of section 133(6) notices, supported an inference of unverifiable purchases, but the assessee had produced purchase bills, delivery challans and banking proof. On those facts, the purchases could not be disallowed in full merely on departmental information; instead, only the profit element embedded in the purchases was brought to tax. Consistent with similar cases, the addition for bogus purchases was restricted to 12.5% of the impugned purchases. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460801