<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (2) TMI 1657 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467439</link>
    <description>Whether an addition for alleged bogus purchases should be limited to a fair estimate of the profit element was decided by applying a Coordinate Bench approach adopting 6% as the estimated profit imbedded in such purchases; the tribunal adjusted that estimate by the assessee&#039;s actual gross profit margin for the year (3.67%) and restricted the disallowance to the difference (2.33% of the alleged bogus purchases), resulting in partial allowance of the assessee&#039;s appeal and dismissal of the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2026 19:01:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=891272" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 1657 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467439</link>
      <description>Whether an addition for alleged bogus purchases should be limited to a fair estimate of the profit element was decided by applying a Coordinate Bench approach adopting 6% as the estimated profit imbedded in such purchases; the tribunal adjusted that estimate by the assessee&#039;s actual gross profit margin for the year (3.67%) and restricted the disallowance to the difference (2.33% of the alleged bogus purchases), resulting in partial allowance of the assessee&#039;s appeal and dismissal of the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467439</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>