Assessee purchased shares of two companies (Esteem and Randers) online through two brokers, namely, ISF and SMC in years 2012 and 2013 and sold said shares in year 2014 and assessee had shown long-term capital gain from sale of shares and had claimed same as exempt under S. 10(38) of the Act. AO received investigation report of DIT (Investigation) regarding list of companies providing bogus long-term capital gain. He held that the assessee was beneficiary in said list and concluded that assessee had entered into colourable device for avoidance of tax and receipt was nothing but unexplained cash credit. CIT (A) also confirmed the addition. On appeal the Tribunal held that shares of two companies were purchased online, payments had been made through banking channel, and shares were dematerialized and sales had been routed from de-mat account and consideration had been received through banking channels. Neither AO conducted any enquiry nor had brought any clinching evidence to disprove evidences produced by assessee. Accordingly since AO had not conducted a separate and independent enquiry to verify investigation report and these transactions took place much before report of Investigation Wing, assessee had successfully discharged onus cast upon him hence addition u/s. 68 is held to be not valid.  (AY. 2014 15, 2015 -16)