https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773414 ITAT Lucknow allowed the assessee's appeal against addition under section 68 for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The CIT(A) had acknowledged that deposits were from business sales and opening cash balance but confirmed addition on ad hoc estimation basis without material evidence to doubt genuineness. ITAT held that CIT(A)'s approach of protecting Revenue interest was improper, as the appellate authority's role is deciding appeals per law, not safeguarding Revenue. Without supporting material to doubt opening balance or business sales, the addition was unjustified. en-us Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jun 2025 08:42:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773414 ITAT Lucknow allowed the assessee's appeal against addition under section 68 for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The CIT(A) had acknowledged that deposits were from business sales and opening cash balance but confirmed addition on ad hoc estimation basis without material evidence to doubt genuineness. ITAT held that CIT(A)'s approach of protecting Revenue interest was improper, as the appellate authority's role is deciding appeals per law, not safeguarding Revenue. Without supporting material to doubt opening balance or business sales, the addition was unjustified. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773414