https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761886 ITAT Hyderabad ruled in favor of the assessee regarding additions under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits deposited during demonetization. The tribunal found that the AO's addition was based on suspicion without contradictory evidence, as the assessee provided supporting documents for cash sales and deposits. The AO incorrectly applied "human probability theory" to exceptional demonetization circumstances and ignored evidence while focusing only on adverse factors. The tribunal held that uniform sales patterns alone cannot invalidate genuine sales, and Rule 114B doesn't mandate PAN collection for sales under Rs. 2 lakhs. The assessee's explanation was supported by proper documentation and VAT returns. en-us Wed, 13 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Nov 2024 08:41:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761886 ITAT Hyderabad ruled in favor of the assessee regarding additions under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits deposited during demonetization. The tribunal found that the AO's addition was based on suspicion without contradictory evidence, as the assessee provided supporting documents for cash sales and deposits. The AO incorrectly applied "human probability theory" to exceptional demonetization circumstances and ignored evidence while focusing only on adverse factors. The tribunal held that uniform sales patterns alone cannot invalidate genuine sales, and Rule 114B doesn't mandate PAN collection for sales under Rs. 2 lakhs. The assessee's explanation was supported by proper documentation and VAT returns. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 13 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761886