Appeal of the assessee dismissed by the Delhi High Court and disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of the Act upheld as the assessee had made purchases in cash and could not substantiate the genuineness of the transaction. Assessee made payment of purchases through bearer cheques to 3 suppliers and filed confirmations from suppliers which were undated and were bearing identical language. As a matter of fact, Tribunal noted that this brought genuineness of the transaction into serious doubt. High Court observed that even though the assessee was a new entrant in the business, as it was mentioned in the confirmations obtained from the suppliers, assessee could have made payment to allay concerns through bank drafts or through other banking channel. Assessee relied on CBDT Circular No. 220 dated 31.05.1977 and submitted that case of the assessee falls under Rule 6DD(j). High Court held that from AY 2009-10, Rule 6DD has been substituted vide Notification No. 97/2008 dated 10.10.2008. Even claim was not allowable as per CBDT Circular 220 dated 31.05.1977, as the assessee could not substantiate the genuineness of the transaction, which is required as per said CBDT Circular. High Court upheld the view of the Tribunal. SLP of assessee is dismissed. (AY. 2013-14)