https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766761 ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting additions made by AO and partially sustained by CIT(A). The tribunal found that the assessee provided sufficient documentary evidence for purchase genuineness, while AO relied on unconfronted oral statements. Additions for bogus purchases, suppressed profits, and stock discrepancies were deleted as unsupported. The tribunal noted that seized documents didn't bear the assessee's name and contained nomenclature ambiguities. Regarding unexplained sales, the tribunal accepted that the concerned individual had already surrendered income in his personal capacity, making additions in the assessee's hands unjustified. en-us Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Mar 2025 07:12:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766761 ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting additions made by AO and partially sustained by CIT(A). The tribunal found that the assessee provided sufficient documentary evidence for purchase genuineness, while AO relied on unconfronted oral statements. Additions for bogus purchases, suppressed profits, and stock discrepancies were deleted as unsupported. The tribunal noted that seized documents didn't bear the assessee's name and contained nomenclature ambiguities. Regarding unexplained sales, the tribunal accepted that the concerned individual had already surrendered income in his personal capacity, making additions in the assessee's hands unjustified. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766761