The assessee is in the business of sale of furniture and allied items on whole sale basis .  AO on  the basis of information received from the office of DIG (Inv), Mumbai and from the Sales Tax Department that in the list of bogus sales parties the names of the aforesaid two parties were included which rendered the purchase transaction doubtful. Show cause notice was issued by the AO to  the assessee to show cause as to why the aforesaid amount should not be treated as unexplained expenditure and added back to the income of the assessee.  The  assessee submitted the detailed reply . AO has doubted  the purchases from impex Trading Co and Victor Intertrade Pvt Ltd  on the grounds  that the assessee has not produced the lorry receipts and other related documents relating to movement of goods , accordingly  disallowed the entire purchase amount paid to parties as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act .   On appeal CIT (A) deleted the addition . Order of CIT (A) was affirmed by the Tribunal . On appeal by the revenue , dismissing the appeal the High Court held that   m ere reliance by the AO on information obtained from the Sales Tax Department or the statements of two persons made before the Sales Tax Department would not be sufficient to treat the purchases as bogus and thereafter to make addition u/s. 69C .  followed CIT v Nikunj Eximp Enterprises  (P)  Ltd  (2015) 372 ITR 619 ( Bom) (HC )  Krishna Textiles  v. . CIT (2009) ,310 ITR 227 (Guj) (HC )( Arising from ITA No 794/Mum .2015 dt  16 -12-2016 (   ITA No.1940 of 2017 dt.29 -01 – 2020 ) ( AY. 2010- 11 ) )