On a writ petition a single judge after hearing both sides passed an order holding that the assessee shall deposit 40 per cent. of the total enforceable demand and furnish sufficient security for 35 per cent. of the total enforceable demand. On appeal dismissing the appeal the Court held that the assessee had failed to prove the genuineness of the credits in the books of account. The assessee could not prove the identity or creditworthiness of the companies which had contributed to the share capital as well as the genuineness of the transaction. Taking note of the assessee’s argument and taking note of Circular No. 1914, the single judge had modified the order of the Assistant Commissioner passed under section 220(6) of the Act demanding the entire enforceable demand and directed deposit of 40 per cent. of the total enforceable demand and furnishing of security to an extent of 35 per cent. of the enforceable total demand which was an equitable order. (AY. 2010-11)