https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786722 Reopening of assessment and additions under unexplained cash credit and unexplained expenditure were examined against documentary market evidence; the Tribunal applied the principle that suspicion cannot substitute proof and that once the assessee produced contract notes, demat records, broker confirmations, bank statements and STT proof, the burden shifts and Revenue must produce cogent rebuttal material. The Tribunal found no specific adverse material impugning the documents or demonstrating rigging or accommodation entry and therefore deleted the additions and allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee. en-us Fri, 13 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Feb 2026 08:11:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786722 Reopening of assessment and additions under unexplained cash credit and unexplained expenditure were examined against documentary market evidence; the Tribunal applied the principle that suspicion cannot substitute proof and that once the assessee produced contract notes, demat records, broker confirmations, bank statements and STT proof, the burden shifts and Revenue must produce cogent rebuttal material. The Tribunal found no specific adverse material impugning the documents or demonstrating rigging or accommodation entry and therefore deleted the additions and allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 13 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786722