https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774822 ITAT Hyderabad allowed the assessee's appeal against addition under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The court held that AO failed to establish whether deposits were in Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) or regular currency. The assessee provided VAT returns, bank statements, and month-wise sales details showing no abnormal deviation in cash deposits compared to previous year (Rs. 58,09,000 in November 2016 vs Rs. 78,69,688 in November 2015). Following Agson Global Pvt. Ltd precedent, ITAT ruled that mere cash deposits during demonetization, without deviation from previous patterns, cannot justify Section 69A addition. The addition was deleted. en-us Mon, 07 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Jul 2025 08:39:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774822 ITAT Hyderabad allowed the assessee's appeal against addition under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The court held that AO failed to establish whether deposits were in Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) or regular currency. The assessee provided VAT returns, bank statements, and month-wise sales details showing no abnormal deviation in cash deposits compared to previous year (Rs. 58,09,000 in November 2016 vs Rs. 78,69,688 in November 2015). Following Agson Global Pvt. Ltd precedent, ITAT ruled that mere cash deposits during demonetization, without deviation from previous patterns, cannot justify Section 69A addition. The addition was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 07 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774822