#section 133(6)

ITAT Pune ruled that income tax assessments are vitiated if the Assessing Officer fails to provide the assessee with third-party replies obtained under Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal emphasized that non-disclosure violates principles of natural justice, setting aside the assessment order and reinforcing procedural fairness in tax proceedings.

ITAT Delhi deleted a Rs 50 lakh addition under Section 68 after the assessee proved the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of share application money using the investor’s filed tax returns and direct verification from the investor company. This reinforces that documentary evidence from tax-compliant third parties, not just bank statements or board resolutions, can satisfy Section 68’s tripartite test - a critical precedent for real estate and startup firms raising equity capital.

The ITAT Kolkata ruled that the Assessing Officer cannot disallow purchases and make a blanket addition merely because the assessee failed to respond to Section 133(6) notices. The burden lies on the department to identify concrete discrepancies in the books, not to penalize silence. This protects taxpayers from arbitrary assessments and reinforces procedural fairness in income tax scrutiny.