https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775442 HC held that the assessee successfully proved purchases were genuine by producing daily stock registers and corroborative RG-23A and RG-23C records verified by the auditor. Despite CIT(A)'s observation that notices under s. 133(6) to the other party were uncomplied and the party was not found during departmental verification, these facts were not communicated to the assessee until the assessment order. Given the transactions occurred seven years prior and the possibility of address changes, the AO did not dispute these facts. The Tribunal rightly concluded that the purchases could not be treated as bogus under s. 69C. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jul 2025 08:28:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775442 HC held that the assessee successfully proved purchases were genuine by producing daily stock registers and corroborative RG-23A and RG-23C records verified by the auditor. Despite CIT(A)'s observation that notices under s. 133(6) to the other party were uncomplied and the party was not found during departmental verification, these facts were not communicated to the assessee until the assessment order. Given the transactions occurred seven years prior and the possibility of address changes, the AO did not dispute these facts. The Tribunal rightly concluded that the purchases could not be treated as bogus under s. 69C. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775442