https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776107 The ITAT Indore upheld the addition under section 69A, holding the assessee as the true owner of substantial cash deposits in two savings accounts. The assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanation or evidence regarding the source of the cash, claimed to be collected as commission agent for his wife's and son's sole proprietary firms. No written contract or list of debtors was produced, and the purported sources remained unsubstantiated despite examination of related parties. The CIT(A) erred in setting aside the assessment order, which was found valid and properly reasoned. The tribunal allowed the revenue's appeal, confirming the addition as income of the assessee due to failure to explain the origin of the cash deposits satisfactorily. en-us Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776107 The ITAT Indore upheld the addition under section 69A, holding the assessee as the true owner of substantial cash deposits in two savings accounts. The assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanation or evidence regarding the source of the cash, claimed to be collected as commission agent for his wife's and son's sole proprietary firms. No written contract or list of debtors was produced, and the purported sources remained unsubstantiated despite examination of related parties. The CIT(A) erred in setting aside the assessment order, which was found valid and properly reasoned. The tribunal allowed the revenue's appeal, confirming the addition as income of the assessee due to failure to explain the origin of the cash deposits satisfactorily. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776107