TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1562
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant herein being the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-13, Kolkata proposed three (03) substantial question of law which are as under: a) Whether in facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in law in quashing the order of CIT(A) without considering the circumstantial evidence brought on record by the Assessing Officer regarding the Vendors/Parties from whom the impugned Purchases were made whose business were not related to the business carrying out by the assessee? b) Whether in facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in law in quashing the order of CIT(A) without considering the circumstantial evidence ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... banking transactions, GST records, stock registers and other documents. It was further noticed that the corresponding sales had not been disputed and that, in the bullion trade, the profit margin was ordinarily very low. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) confirmed the addition. On further appeal, however, the learned Tribunal examined the material on record and found, inter alia, that: a) the assessee was engaged in the trading of bullion; b) the corresponding sales and closing stock had not been rejected or disputed; c) the payments to the vendors had been made through banking channels; d) the transactions were reflected in the GST records during the relevant period; e) the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at treating the entire purchases as bogus would result in an unrealistic and commercially incongruous gross-profit rate. 10. The Revenue has not been able to demonstrate that the findings of the Tribunal are perverse, that they are based on no evidence, or that any material piece of evidence has been ignored in a manner giving rise to a substantial question of law. The mere fact that the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had taken a different view of the evidence does not justify interference under Section 260A of the Act. 11. The question whether the vendors were genuine, whether the documents produced by the assessee were sufficient to establish the purchases, and what gross-profit rate should reasonably ....