https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784715 The dominant issue was the correct measure of addition for alleged bogus purchases where purchase and sale were not fully substantiated due to non-maintenance of quantitative details. Applying settled precedents that only embedded profit can be taxed when sales are accepted, and considering the declared gross profit rate of 5.59%, the Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s estimate of 12.5% for suppressed profits was excessive on the facts. The Tribunal estimated suppressed profit attributable to the impugned purchases at 6%, sustained the addition to that extent, and deleted the balance disallowance; the assessee's appeal was partly allowed and the Revenue's appeal dismissed. en-us Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jan 2026 08:25:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784715 The dominant issue was the correct measure of addition for alleged bogus purchases where purchase and sale were not fully substantiated due to non-maintenance of quantitative details. Applying settled precedents that only embedded profit can be taxed when sales are accepted, and considering the declared gross profit rate of 5.59%, the Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s estimate of 12.5% for suppressed profits was excessive on the facts. The Tribunal estimated suppressed profit attributable to the impugned purchases at 6%, sustained the addition to that extent, and deleted the balance disallowance; the assessee's appeal was partly allowed and the Revenue's appeal dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784715