https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757958 ITAT Chennai ruled in favor of the assessee regarding cash deposits during demonetization period. The AO made additions under section 68 solely because the assessee was not eligible to transact in specified bank notes post-demonetization. However, the AO failed to dispute that the assessee had legitimate cash sales and collections from debtors before demonetization. The CIT(A) also erred by not examining the consistent transaction pattern and cash sales history. ITAT set aside the CIT(A) order and directed the AO to delete the section 68 addition. The assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 14 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Sep 2024 07:50:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757958 ITAT Chennai ruled in favor of the assessee regarding cash deposits during demonetization period. The AO made additions under section 68 solely because the assessee was not eligible to transact in specified bank notes post-demonetization. However, the AO failed to dispute that the assessee had legitimate cash sales and collections from debtors before demonetization. The CIT(A) also erred by not examining the consistent transaction pattern and cash sales history. ITAT set aside the CIT(A) order and directed the AO to delete the section 68 addition. The assessee's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 14 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757958