https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428831 The Tribunal found that the cash deposits made by the assessee during the demonetization period were from the recorded cash balance in the books of account, supported by advance money received from customers for jewelry sales. As the transactions were below Rs. 2 lakhs and the books of account were not rejected, the Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for treating the deposits as unexplained income under section 68 of the Act. Citing relevant case laws, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs. 45 lakhs, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. en-us Tue, 26 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Apr 2026 18:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428831 The Tribunal found that the cash deposits made by the assessee during the demonetization period were from the recorded cash balance in the books of account, supported by advance money received from customers for jewelry sales. As the transactions were below Rs. 2 lakhs and the books of account were not rejected, the Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for treating the deposits as unexplained income under section 68 of the Act. Citing relevant case laws, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs. 45 lakhs, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428831