https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785364 Disallowance for unexplained purchases cannot rest solely on a director's statement absent independent enquiry or corroborative evidence; documentary proof and commercial practices (sale in transit) must be considered. A binding precedent requiring full disallowance applies only when its foundational facts exist, and cannot be mechanically applied here. The factual matrix showed opacity suggesting possible profit suppression but not wholly fictitious purchases, warranting calibration of the precedent and sustaining an estimated addition equal to the profit element (6% of purchases); appeal is partly allowed with the reduced addition upheld. en-us Mon, 19 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Jan 2026 08:41:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785364 Disallowance for unexplained purchases cannot rest solely on a director's statement absent independent enquiry or corroborative evidence; documentary proof and commercial practices (sale in transit) must be considered. A binding precedent requiring full disallowance applies only when its foundational facts exist, and cannot be mechanically applied here. The factual matrix showed opacity suggesting possible profit suppression but not wholly fictitious purchases, warranting calibration of the precedent and sustaining an estimated addition equal to the profit element (6% of purchases); appeal is partly allowed with the reduced addition upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 19 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785364