https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456563 ITAT Jaipur allowed the assessee's appeal challenging PCIT's revision order u/s 263 regarding unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The assessee deposited Rs. 51.60 lacs, including Rs. 16.80 lacs in demonetized currency. PCIT contended AO failed to conduct proper inquiry into the deposits and didn't verify supporting documents. ITAT held that the assessee provided adequate details across four instances during assessment proceedings to substantiate the cash source. Since PCIT didn't dispute the source of total deposits but only questioned the demonetized portion without specific evidence, and the assessee submitted all relevant details, PCIT's general observations without pinpointing specific defects constituted mere review rather than valid grounds for revision. The assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue interests. en-us Mon, 17 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Aug 2024 20:46:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456563 ITAT Jaipur allowed the assessee's appeal challenging PCIT's revision order u/s 263 regarding unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The assessee deposited Rs. 51.60 lacs, including Rs. 16.80 lacs in demonetized currency. PCIT contended AO failed to conduct proper inquiry into the deposits and didn't verify supporting documents. ITAT held that the assessee provided adequate details across four instances during assessment proceedings to substantiate the cash source. Since PCIT didn't dispute the source of total deposits but only questioned the demonetized portion without specific evidence, and the assessee submitted all relevant details, PCIT's general observations without pinpointing specific defects constituted mere review rather than valid grounds for revision. The assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue interests. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456563