https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457297 The ITAT Chennai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to use the peak credit method for determining unexplained cash deposits as unexplained income. The CIT(A) had allowed set-off of opening cash balance and advances when calculating peak credits. While the ITAT noted that peak credits from earlier years should ideally be considered for explaining current year credits, it did not direct this approach as assessees had not raised this ground and it would require fact verification. The Revenue failed to demonstrate any error in CIT(A)'s findings. A coordinate bench had previously upheld similar findings for another group member. Both assessee and Revenue appeals were dismissed. en-us Wed, 13 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 15 Sep 2024 01:19:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457297 The ITAT Chennai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to use the peak credit method for determining unexplained cash deposits as unexplained income. The CIT(A) had allowed set-off of opening cash balance and advances when calculating peak credits. While the ITAT noted that peak credits from earlier years should ideally be considered for explaining current year credits, it did not direct this approach as assessees had not raised this ground and it would require fact verification. The Revenue failed to demonstrate any error in CIT(A)'s findings. A coordinate bench had previously upheld similar findings for another group member. Both assessee and Revenue appeals were dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 13 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457297