https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465397 Where sales were not doubted, the Tribunal held that purchases could not be treated as entirely bogus merely because invoices were obtained from an accommodation entry provider, particularly when the assessee's GP (12.63%) exceeded the preceding year's GP (9.2%) and the Revenue produced no corroborative evidence beyond the operator's statement. However, since the assessee failed to substantiate transportation of goods, the Tribunal inferred that supplies were sourced from third parties and only the profit element embedded in such purchases was taxable under the settled jurisdictional HC approach. The addition was therefore restricted to 5% over the disclosed GP, directing estimation at 17.63% and sustaining addition only to that extent; the appeal was partly allowed. en-us Thu, 16 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 21:18:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465397 Where sales were not doubted, the Tribunal held that purchases could not be treated as entirely bogus merely because invoices were obtained from an accommodation entry provider, particularly when the assessee's GP (12.63%) exceeded the preceding year's GP (9.2%) and the Revenue produced no corroborative evidence beyond the operator's statement. However, since the assessee failed to substantiate transportation of goods, the Tribunal inferred that supplies were sourced from third parties and only the profit element embedded in such purchases was taxable under the settled jurisdictional HC approach. The addition was therefore restricted to 5% over the disclosed GP, directing estimation at 17.63% and sustaining addition only to that extent; the appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 16 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465397