Section 69A addition fails where alleged transaction material was not disclosed or confronted to the assessee.

An addition under section 69A could not be sustained where the Assessing Officer relied on alleged accommodation-entry material without furnishing the underlying transaction details, breakup, scrips, concerns, or corroborative evidence to the assessee. The burden to explain an alleged unexplained amount arises only after credible material is disclosed and confronted; material gathered behind the assessee's back cannot justify the addition. The deletion of the addition was therefore upheld and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the deletion of the addition made under section 69A was justified when the Revenue did not furnish the material or transaction details relied upon for making the addition.

Analysis: The assessee had denied any transaction with the alleged accommodation-entry concerns and had specifically sought the underlying details and materials relied upon by the Assessing Officer. The assessment order did not disclose the breakup of the amount, the scrips or concerns involved, or any corroborative statement or documentary evidence supporting the alleged transaction. An addition cannot be sustained on material gathered behind the back of the assessee and not confronted to him, since the burden to explain arises only after credible material is disclosed and put to the assessee.

Conclusion: The deletion of the addition under section 69A was in law and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---