https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773652 The ITAT Ahmedabad dismissed the Department's appeal regarding unexplained income under Section 69A during demonetization period in November 2016. The assessee provided documentary evidence for high-value fund transfers, shifting burden to Revenue to disprove claims. The AO failed to conduct independent inquiry or issue summons under Section 131 or notices under Section 133(6). Since transactions were properly recorded, documented, and explained without any rebuttal from Revenue, CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition. The Tribunal upheld that refund of earlier advances cannot be added under Section 68. en-us Mon, 23 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:35:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773652 The ITAT Ahmedabad dismissed the Department's appeal regarding unexplained income under Section 69A during demonetization period in November 2016. The assessee provided documentary evidence for high-value fund transfers, shifting burden to Revenue to disprove claims. The AO failed to conduct independent inquiry or issue summons under Section 131 or notices under Section 133(6). Since transactions were properly recorded, documented, and explained without any rebuttal from Revenue, CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition. The Tribunal upheld that refund of earlier advances cannot be added under Section 68. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 23 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773652