← All Phrases

“genuineness of the transaction”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 685,938 judgments

RAMESHKUMAR KARSANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(5), SURAT

Accordingly the estimated addition made of Rs.35,166/-[0.5% of 70,33,182/-] by the AC invoking provision of section 69C of the I.T Act stand deleted. Thus this ground is allowed

ITA 669/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 10(38)Section 115Section 115BSection 250Section 68Section 69C

company and that the purchase transaction was an off-market transaction. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee had failed to substantiate the genuineness of the transaction with complete documentary evidence; therefore, the Assessing Officer treated the entire sale proceeds of Rs.70,33,182/- as unexplained cash Rameshkumar Karsanbhai Patel ... purchase and Sales of shares of M/s Sunrise Asian Limited undoubtedly But I find from the assessment order that the AO has doubted genuineness of said transactions not only in assessment order but also he has established how the price of shares of the penny stock companies are rigged

GYAN PRAKASH GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-10(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6271/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlate Gyan Prakash Gupta Vs. Ito Through Legal Heir Raj Ward 10(4) Kumari Gupta New Delhi Plot No.6 & 7, Defence Enclave, Laxmi Nagar, East Delhi 110092 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adupg 2697 N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Ajit Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

only on suspicion. 12. That the addition has been confirmed despite the assessee bringing on record all evidences and material to prove the genuineness of the transaction. 13. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming ... sale of shares in that case. On such basis, the ITAT had returned the finding of fact against the Assessee, holding that the genuineness of share transaction was not established by him. However, this is quite different from the factual matrix at hand. Similarly, the case of Sumati Dayal

H R MOTORS,HIMATNAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 1764/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 68

name, full address and Cell Phone Numbers of the customers. The A.O. would have called for on sample basis to verify the genuineness of the transaction which is not done by the A.O. 8. Whereas the assessee has discharged its initial onus cast upon it by giving name, full address

INCOME TAX OFFICER-17(1)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ANANTAM, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 8819/MUM/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri D.C. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

suppliers which was alleged to be bogus purchases. The Ld. DR further stated that though the Ld. AO has not verified the genuineness of the transaction, the assessee has not furnished complete details of the transport, delivery challan etc. to prove the genuineness of the purchases made with ... voluminous details such as purchase and sales invoices, ledgers and bank statements etc. discharging its initial onus casted upon it in proving the genuineness of the transaction. The Ld. AR further stated that the Ld. AO has not verified the documents submitted by the M/s. Anantam assessee neither has issued

INCOME TAX OFFICER-17(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ANANTAM, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 8818/MUM/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri D.C. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

suppliers which was alleged to be bogus purchases. The Ld. DR further stated that though the Ld. AO has not verified the genuineness of the transaction, the assessee has not furnished complete details of the transport, delivery challan etc. to prove the genuineness of the purchases made with ... voluminous details such as purchase and sales invoices, ledgers and bank statements etc. discharging its initial onus casted upon it in proving the genuineness of the transaction. The Ld. AR further stated that the Ld. AO has not verified the documents submitted by the M/s. Anantam assessee neither has issued

NARAYAN BARTER PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-6(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2572/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

banking channels. The assessee argued that it had discharged the initial onus under section 68 by proving the identity of the creditors, the genuineness of the transactions, and the creditworthiness of the parties. Copies of sale bills and bank statements were also filed in support. The assessee contended that ... assessee had failed to provide PAN numbers and current addresses of the entities involved, making it impossible for the AO to verify the genuineness of the transactions independently by issuing notices under section 133(6). The AO's conclusion that the addition of Rs. 81,50,000/- as unexplained cash

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7844/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2024-25
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7843/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2023-24
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7842/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

held that Assessing Officer is against the assessee. against the assessee. duty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the creditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and the veracity of the repudiation. repudiation. repudiation. In the instant case repudiation. assessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder assessee has furnished complete ... letter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to 25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed the genuineness of the transaction. However, some persons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the total share capital

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7841/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7840/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

held that Assessing Officer is against the assessee. against the assessee. duty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the creditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and the veracity of the repudiation. repudiation. repudiation. In the instant case repudiation. assessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder assessee has furnished complete ... letter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to 25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed the genuineness of the transaction. However, some persons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the total share capital

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7839/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7838/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -05 , DELHI

ITA 5521/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

held that Assessing Officer is against the assessee. against the assessee. duty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the creditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and the veracity of the repudiation. repudiation. repudiation. In the instant case repudiation. assessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder assessee has furnished complete ... letter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to 25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed the genuineness of the transaction. However, some persons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the total share capital

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5520/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2023-24
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5519/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5518/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5517/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5516/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5515/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

without more,\nagainst the assessee. It was held that Assessing Officer is\nduty-bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the\ncreditor/subscriber the genuineness of the transaction and\nthe veracity of the repudiation. In the instant case\nassessee has furnished complete details of the shareholder\nalongwith bank statements, confirmation and therefore ... nletter under Section 133 (6) of the Act at random basis to\n25 persons, out of whom some of the persons confirmed\nthe genuineness of the transaction. However, some\npersons did not respond. In view of this fact, out of the\ntotal share capital of Rs.54,28,500/-, the Assessing

Showing 1–20 of 5,938 · Page 1 of 297

...