Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that; The fact that s. 133(6) notices could not be served upon the alleged vendors and they were not physically available at the given addresses does not falsify the claim of the assessee that the purchases are genuine if the assessee has produced other evidence and made payments through banking channels, addition confirmed by the CIT(A) was deleted . (AY. 2009-10 , 2010-11)
Prabhat Gupta v. ITO (Mum)(Trib) , www.itatonline.org
S.69C: Unexplained expenditure -Bogus purchases- Non service of notice cannot be the basis to confirm the addition as bogus purchases considering other evidences purchases cannot be assessed as alleged bogus purchases .