https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783503 ITAT Delhi-AT allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting the addition made u/s 69. While the reopening u/s 147/151 was based on information alleging bogus purchases/expenses through RTGS, the AO invoked s.69, which applies to unexplained investments not recorded in the books. The Tribunal held that in a case of alleged bogus purchases, there was neither any unrecorded investment nor discrepancy in stock, and the books were not rejected nor their veracity doubted. In absence of any allegation that the purchases were made from undisclosed sources, the conditions for invoking s.69 were not satisfied, rendering the addition unsustainable. en-us Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Dec 2025 08:28:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783503 ITAT Delhi-AT allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting the addition made u/s 69. While the reopening u/s 147/151 was based on information alleging bogus purchases/expenses through RTGS, the AO invoked s.69, which applies to unexplained investments not recorded in the books. The Tribunal held that in a case of alleged bogus purchases, there was neither any unrecorded investment nor discrepancy in stock, and the books were not rejected nor their veracity doubted. In absence of any allegation that the purchases were made from undisclosed sources, the conditions for invoking s.69 were not satisfied, rendering the addition unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783503