https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338375 Addition for alleged bogus purchases was made as unexplained expenditure under s. 69C. The assessee produced purchase invoices, ledger accounts, and bank statements evidencing payment by account-payee cheques, and the AO did not dispute the banking trail, thereby explaining the source of the expenditure. Further, the AO's allegation that the entries were mere accommodation entries implied no actual expenditure was incurred, which is legally inconsistent with invoking s. 69C (which targets unexplained sources of expenditure). Consequently, the invocation of s. 69C was held misconceived and the addition in respect of purchases from the seven parties was deleted. en-us Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Dec 2025 13:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338375 Addition for alleged bogus purchases was made as unexplained expenditure under s. 69C. The assessee produced purchase invoices, ledger accounts, and bank statements evidencing payment by account-payee cheques, and the AO did not dispute the banking trail, thereby explaining the source of the expenditure. Further, the AO's allegation that the entries were mere accommodation entries implied no actual expenditure was incurred, which is legally inconsistent with invoking s. 69C (which targets unexplained sources of expenditure). Consequently, the invocation of s. 69C was held misconceived and the addition in respect of purchases from the seven parties was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338375