<?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 (7) TMI 1687 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795801</link>
    <description>Alleged bogus-purchase additions cannot rest on suspicion or a search statement where audited books, supplier confirmations and contemporaneous records establish genuine purchases and manufacturing consumption. The documented evidence included invoices, e-way bills, transport and weighment records, banking payments, GST compliance, stock and production records, and yield reconciliation. Suppliers directly confirmed the transactions, profitability remained consistent with prior performance, and no defects or evidentiary discrepancies were identified. The article notes that the estimated addition was deleted for both assessment years because no substantive contrary material supported the allegation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2026 08:30:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=913890" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 1687 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795801</link>
      <description>Alleged bogus-purchase additions cannot rest on suspicion or a search statement where audited books, supplier confirmations and contemporaneous records establish genuine purchases and manufacturing consumption. The documented evidence included invoices, e-way bills, transport and weighment records, banking payments, GST compliance, stock and production records, and yield reconciliation. Suppliers directly confirmed the transactions, profitability remained consistent with prior performance, and no defects or evidentiary discrepancies were identified. The article notes that the estimated addition was deleted for both assessment years because no substantive contrary material supported the allegation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795801</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>