https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463284 ITAT held that an addition under s.68 was correctly made where a sum was credited in the assessee's books, even though the cheque was not encashed; the CIT(A) erred in requiring bank credit. The Tribunal affirmed that s.68 is attracted by book entries and that the assessee must explain paper transactions or face adverse inference. It further held the "real income" theory cannot nullify specific taxing provisions; deeming provisions (e.g., s.2(22)(e)) can render non-commercial receipts taxable. Revenue's appeal was allowed and the addition reinstated. en-us Fri, 13 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Aug 2025 08:36:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463284 ITAT held that an addition under s.68 was correctly made where a sum was credited in the assessee's books, even though the cheque was not encashed; the CIT(A) erred in requiring bank credit. The Tribunal affirmed that s.68 is attracted by book entries and that the assessee must explain paper transactions or face adverse inference. It further held the "real income" theory cannot nullify specific taxing provisions; deeming provisions (e.g., s.2(22)(e)) can render non-commercial receipts taxable. Revenue's appeal was allowed and the addition reinstated. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 13 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463284