https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755956 ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding bogus purchases, the tribunal found the company provided sufficient evidence including transport receipts, Form C, e-way bills, GST payments, and stock registers. Since the AO did not doubt quantitative sales details and no evidence showed payment routing back to assessee, the entire addition for alleged bogus purchases was deleted. Second, concerning property purchase under Section 56(2)(x), the tribunal held that when assessee disputes stamp duty value claiming distressed sale, AO must mandatorily refer valuation to DVO, not optionally. Since no DVO reference was made despite assessee's dispute, the addition was unsustainable and deleted. en-us Tue, 02 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jul 2024 07:38:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755956 ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding bogus purchases, the tribunal found the company provided sufficient evidence including transport receipts, Form C, e-way bills, GST payments, and stock registers. Since the AO did not doubt quantitative sales details and no evidence showed payment routing back to assessee, the entire addition for alleged bogus purchases was deleted. Second, concerning property purchase under Section 56(2)(x), the tribunal held that when assessee disputes stamp duty value claiming distressed sale, AO must mandatorily refer valuation to DVO, not optionally. Since no DVO reference was made despite assessee's dispute, the addition was unsustainable and deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 02 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755956