https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784438 Disallowance under s.40A(2)(b) for purchases from a related concern was held unsustainable because the AO failed to produce comparables or other material to show that the price paid was excessive or unreasonable; since the assessee bought goods at the same discounted price at which the related concern had acquired them, the disallowance was deleted. On addition for cash deposits claimed as accumulated cash gifts, the assessee could not fully substantiate the source; the CIT(A)'s estimation granting 50% relief on grounds of reasonableness was upheld and the balance 50% was sustained as unexplained. On denial of cost of improvement, additional evidence and bank-trail payments supported genuineness and sources, and the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was affirmed. en-us Wed, 31 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2026 08:04:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784438 Disallowance under s.40A(2)(b) for purchases from a related concern was held unsustainable because the AO failed to produce comparables or other material to show that the price paid was excessive or unreasonable; since the assessee bought goods at the same discounted price at which the related concern had acquired them, the disallowance was deleted. On addition for cash deposits claimed as accumulated cash gifts, the assessee could not fully substantiate the source; the CIT(A)'s estimation granting 50% relief on grounds of reasonableness was upheld and the balance 50% was sustained as unexplained. On denial of cost of improvement, additional evidence and bank-trail payments supported genuineness and sources, and the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was affirmed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 31 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784438