https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765109 The ITAT SURAT-AT set aside the CIT(A)'s order regarding unexplained investment additions under Section 69 and 69A. The assessee claimed to have sold bullion during demonetization and deposited demonetized currency in a third party's bank account. The AO made additions based on a partner's statement recorded under Section 131(1A) and survey reports. The ITAT found that the AO failed to follow CBDT's Standard Operating Procedures for demonetization cases, which are binding on all officers per SC precedent. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh assessment following proper verification procedures and CBDT guidelines. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Jan 2025 08:26:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765109 The ITAT SURAT-AT set aside the CIT(A)'s order regarding unexplained investment additions under Section 69 and 69A. The assessee claimed to have sold bullion during demonetization and deposited demonetized currency in a third party's bank account. The AO made additions based on a partner's statement recorded under Section 131(1A) and survey reports. The ITAT found that the AO failed to follow CBDT's Standard Operating Procedures for demonetization cases, which are binding on all officers per SC precedent. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh assessment following proper verification procedures and CBDT guidelines. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765109