https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456202 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the addition made u/s 68 for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The tribunal found that since the assessee maintained audited books of accounts which were not rejected by the AO, and cash deposits in 2016 (Rs. 54 lakh) were significantly lower than 2015 (Rs. 2.62 crore), the revenue authorities were precluded from making additions. CIT(A)'s order sustaining the addition was held erroneous without valid reasoning. en-us Tue, 27 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jul 2024 06:36:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456202 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the addition made u/s 68 for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The tribunal found that since the assessee maintained audited books of accounts which were not rejected by the AO, and cash deposits in 2016 (Rs. 54 lakh) were significantly lower than 2015 (Rs. 2.62 crore), the revenue authorities were precluded from making additions. CIT(A)'s order sustaining the addition was held erroneous without valid reasoning. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 27 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456202