https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772026 The ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict addition to 15% on alleged bogus purchases. The assessee successfully discharged the burden of proof by providing complete evidence regarding purchase sources and payments. Despite VAT department reports identifying sellers as hawala traders, the AO failed to conduct independent investigation. The tribunal distinguished the case from Kanak Impex precedent, noting factual variance. Revenue's appeal was dismissed as the assessee had adequately substantiated the genuineness of transactions through proper documentation and payment evidence. en-us Fri, 23 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Jun 2025 08:50:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772026 The ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict addition to 15% on alleged bogus purchases. The assessee successfully discharged the burden of proof by providing complete evidence regarding purchase sources and payments. Despite VAT department reports identifying sellers as hawala traders, the AO failed to conduct independent investigation. The tribunal distinguished the case from Kanak Impex precedent, noting factual variance. Revenue's appeal was dismissed as the assessee had adequately substantiated the genuineness of transactions through proper documentation and payment evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772026