<?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>2026 (5) TMI 686 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791484</link>
    <description>ITAT Mumbai applied the settled bogus purchase approach by treating only the profit element as taxable where purchases were recorded in the books but sourced from the open or grey market through accommodation bills. On that factual basis, the appellate estimate of addition at 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases was sustained because it reflected the embedded profit rather than the entire purchase value. The Revenue&#039;s challenge failed, and the restricted addition was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 08:50:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=901181" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 686 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791484</link>
      <description>ITAT Mumbai applied the settled bogus purchase approach by treating only the profit element as taxable where purchases were recorded in the books but sourced from the open or grey market through accommodation bills. On that factual basis, the appellate estimate of addition at 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases was sustained because it reflected the embedded profit rather than the entire purchase value. The Revenue&#039;s challenge failed, and the restricted addition was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791484</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>