The Tribunal observed that the Assessee Company had placed substantial material before the AO to establish the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transaction. It further observed that the Assessee was not provided an opportunity to rebut the statement made by the third person Shirish Shah and the Promoter of Prraneta Industries Ltd. by stating them to be “confidential” in nature and therefore they cannot be read in evidence against the Assessee. It was also submitted by the Assessee that the Promoter of Prraneta Industries Ltd. later on retracted from his statement and therefore there was no case for reopening of the assessment. It was further submitted that the Indore bench of the tribunal had dismissed the group departmental appeals in case of certain other companies in respect of the same Investor Company, Prraneta Industries Ltd. based on the same information received in search in cases of the third person, Shirish C. Shah and deleted the additions on the merits of the case. The order was further upheld by the Madhya Pradesh High Court and ultimately the Supreme Court. Similar judgments were passed by the Delhi Bench of the tribunal in case of other companies and therefore it was submitted that the present case was covered by these decisions on identical facts. Thus on the basis of facts of the case and law as well as relying upon the decisions of the coordinate benches, the Tribunal ultimately concluded that the Assessee Company has adequately established the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and the genuineness of transaction and therefore deleted the addition made u/s 68 of the Act. (AY. 2010-11).