TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the addition of Rs. 5,00,000 made to the assessee's total income as unexplained cash credits under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (with tax implications under Section 115BBE) in respect of cash deposited during the demonetisation period is sustainable.
Analysis: The issue was examined on the record of deposits during the demonetisation period, the cash flow statement, bank withdrawal particulars, timing of filing of returns, and documentary material claimed to support business receipts from stitching, embroidery and pressing. Relevant legal framework includes Section 69A (unexplained cash credits), the operation of higher tax rates applicable under Section 115BBE, and provisions governing regular assessment and interest calculation (including Section 143(3) and Section 234B). The authorities below disbelieved the newly reported business receipts as an afterthought introduced after the deposit and noted that several bank withdrawals cited as earlier cash sources were effected by third parties or were otherwise unavailable for later deposit; the lower authorities also allowed Rs. 3,00,000 as accumulated past savings and treated the balance Rs. 5,00,000 as unexplained. The Tribunal found the cash flow statement incomplete as it omitted full inflows/outflows, that purchase invoices without corresponding evidence of sales/job work were inadequate to prove generation of the deposited cash, and that no credible evidence (identities/affidavits of third-party withdrawers or regular customer records) was furnished to rebut the finding of unexplained cash. The assessment of interest on assessed income and initiation of penalty proceedings were considered in the context of the statutory provisions cited.
Conclusion: The addition of Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 69A is upheld and the assessee's appeal is dismissed; the decision is therefore against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
