https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754754 ITAT Ahmedabad allowed the assessee's appeal regarding unexplained money under section 69A for cash deposits during demonetization. The CIT(A) had incorrectly rejected additional evidence without applying independent judgment, merely following the AO's guidance contrary to legal provisions. The tribunal found cash deposits were primarily for payments to Gujarat Agro Industries, a state government organization dealing in agricultural produce, representing legitimate business transactions. The tribunal directed CIT(A) to admit additional evidence under rule 46A and adjudicate the matter afresh on merits, emphasizing that legitimate business transactions during demonetization cannot be taxed under section 69A. en-us Wed, 21 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Jun 2024 09:01:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754754 ITAT Ahmedabad allowed the assessee's appeal regarding unexplained money under section 69A for cash deposits during demonetization. The CIT(A) had incorrectly rejected additional evidence without applying independent judgment, merely following the AO's guidance contrary to legal provisions. The tribunal found cash deposits were primarily for payments to Gujarat Agro Industries, a state government organization dealing in agricultural produce, representing legitimate business transactions. The tribunal directed CIT(A) to admit additional evidence under rule 46A and adjudicate the matter afresh on merits, emphasizing that legitimate business transactions during demonetization cannot be taxed under section 69A. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 21 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754754