https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449174 ITAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of the assessee in two Section 68 additions. First, regarding cash deposits of Rs. 50 lakhs during demonetization, the tribunal held that sales proceeds from jewelry business were adequately explained through business permits, VAT registration, sales bills, and audited books. AO's rejection based solely on absence of stock register was improper without pointing specific defects in documentation. Second, concerning unsecured loans, the tribunal found assessee discharged primary onus by providing creditors' PAN, ITR copies, bank statements, and ledger confirmations. Revenue failed to bring contrary evidence or conduct independent investigation under Section 133(6)/131(1). Both additions were deleted. en-us Wed, 04 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Feb 2024 10:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449174 ITAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of the assessee in two Section 68 additions. First, regarding cash deposits of Rs. 50 lakhs during demonetization, the tribunal held that sales proceeds from jewelry business were adequately explained through business permits, VAT registration, sales bills, and audited books. AO's rejection based solely on absence of stock register was improper without pointing specific defects in documentation. Second, concerning unsecured loans, the tribunal found assessee discharged primary onus by providing creditors' PAN, ITR copies, bank statements, and ledger confirmations. Revenue failed to bring contrary evidence or conduct independent investigation under Section 133(6)/131(1). Both additions were deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449174