Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
ITAT upheld deletion of additions under s.69A r.w.s. 115BBE regarding cash deposits made during demonetization period. The taxpayer successfully demonstrated that deposits originated from legitimate cash sales recorded in books of accounts and verified by statutory authorities. ITAT found that cash generated through sales was properly credited in books and supported by TNVAT records and chartered accountant audit. The AO's allegations of abnormal sales patterns were rejected as based merely on suspicion without concrete evidence. Double taxation was deemed impermissible since sales were already reflected in accounts and offered for tax. The Tribunal concluded s.69A provisions were inapplicable as source of deposits was satisfactorily explained through documented business transactions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.