https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25555 HC held that the taxpayer had established that payments to two commission agents were genuine and that it had discharged the primary onus of identifying those agents. Evidence showed business correspondence, transactions routed through the agents, and payments made by bank instruments with at least one agent maintaining a bank account. The Tribunal's reliance on unserved summonses issued four years later was insufficient to infer nonexistence. With no rebuttal evidence from Revenue, HC found it unreasonable to deny the deductions and answered the referred question in favour of the taxpayer. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25555 HC held that the taxpayer had established that payments to two commission agents were genuine and that it had discharged the primary onus of identifying those agents. Evidence showed business correspondence, transactions routed through the agents, and payments made by bank instruments with at least one agent maintaining a bank account. The Tribunal's reliance on unserved summonses issued four years later was insufficient to infer nonexistence. With no rebuttal evidence from Revenue, HC found it unreasonable to deny the deductions and answered the referred question in favour of the taxpayer. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 Dec 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25555