https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774826 ITAT Delhi held that AO erred in invoking section 69C to disallow contract charges. Assessee provided complete details including contractor names, PANs, contact details, amounts paid, and TDS deducted. AO's conclusion that payments were doubtful based solely on receiving one confirmation from test check notices u/s 133(6) was insufficient. Section 69C applies only to expenditure outside books of account, but here payments were recorded with TDS compliance. CIT(A) correctly found expenses genuine, noting lower percentage claims with higher net profit ratios compared to previous years. ITAT ruled AO failed to properly examine transaction genuineness despite revision u/s 263 directions. en-us Wed, 09 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Jul 2025 08:39:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774826 ITAT Delhi held that AO erred in invoking section 69C to disallow contract charges. Assessee provided complete details including contractor names, PANs, contact details, amounts paid, and TDS deducted. AO's conclusion that payments were doubtful based solely on receiving one confirmation from test check notices u/s 133(6) was insufficient. Section 69C applies only to expenditure outside books of account, but here payments were recorded with TDS compliance. CIT(A) correctly found expenses genuine, noting lower percentage claims with higher net profit ratios compared to previous years. ITAT ruled AO failed to properly examine transaction genuineness despite revision u/s 263 directions. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 09 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774826