https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766911 ITAT Indore allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting additions made under section 69A for unexplained bank deposits during demonetization and for difference in opening stock value. The tribunal held that the AO's rejection of the assessee's explanation of business sales as source of deposited cash, based solely on non-response to section 133(6) notices to customers, was invalid when books of accounts showed no fallacies. Regarding opening stock, the tribunal accepted that jewellery previously held as fixed assets became trading stock when the assessee commenced trading operations after VAT registration, supported by purchase bills and documentary evidence. en-us Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Mar 2025 07:35:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766911 ITAT Indore allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting additions made under section 69A for unexplained bank deposits during demonetization and for difference in opening stock value. The tribunal held that the AO's rejection of the assessee's explanation of business sales as source of deposited cash, based solely on non-response to section 133(6) notices to customers, was invalid when books of accounts showed no fallacies. Regarding opening stock, the tribunal accepted that jewellery previously held as fixed assets became trading stock when the assessee commenced trading operations after VAT registration, supported by purchase bills and documentary evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766911