https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751707 The ITAT Delhi upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete additions made by the AO on two grounds. First, regarding unsecured loans treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68, the tribunal found that amounts received were genuine advances for goods sale, not loans. The assessee provided comprehensive documentation including books of accounts, stock registers, VAT returns, and TIN details. Sales occurred through banking channels and were accepted by revenue authorities in subsequent assessment years. Second, concerning bogus purchases, the tribunal confirmed deletion of disallowance as the CIT(A) verified purchase details through stock registers attested by Market Committee, established reasonable yield percentages, and noted that corresponding sales were accepted by the AO. Both appeals by revenue were dismissed. en-us Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Apr 2024 09:13:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751707 The ITAT Delhi upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete additions made by the AO on two grounds. First, regarding unsecured loans treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68, the tribunal found that amounts received were genuine advances for goods sale, not loans. The assessee provided comprehensive documentation including books of accounts, stock registers, VAT returns, and TIN details. Sales occurred through banking channels and were accepted by revenue authorities in subsequent assessment years. Second, concerning bogus purchases, the tribunal confirmed deletion of disallowance as the CIT(A) verified purchase details through stock registers attested by Market Committee, established reasonable yield percentages, and noted that corresponding sales were accepted by the AO. Both appeals by revenue were dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751707