https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459243 ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69A for cash deposits during demonetization period was unjustified. Assessee's books were tax audited under section 44AB with sales properly recorded and supported by monthly registers. Revenue failed to establish non-genuine sales, relying only on suspicion. The tribunal found AO's approach fallacious in accepting non-SBN cash deposits while rejecting SBN deposits from same transactions, as customers could pay in both denominations. Revenue failed to discharge burden of proof despite assessee providing documentary evidence. Appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Dec 2024 21:12:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459243 ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69A for cash deposits during demonetization period was unjustified. Assessee's books were tax audited under section 44AB with sales properly recorded and supported by monthly registers. Revenue failed to establish non-genuine sales, relying only on suspicion. The tribunal found AO's approach fallacious in accepting non-SBN cash deposits while rejecting SBN deposits from same transactions, as customers could pay in both denominations. Revenue failed to discharge burden of proof despite assessee providing documentary evidence. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459243