https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779495 ITAT PUNE - AT allowed the taxpayer's appeal, holding that the CIT(A) erred in sustaining an addition for unexplained cash deposits. The tribunal found the assesssee's agricultural income shown in the return was net income, so gross receipts would exceed that figure, and noted a factual arithmetic discrepancy in reported cash deposits. The assessee produced bills totaling about Rs.6,34,147 which neither the AO nor CIT(A) disputed. On these facts, the addition was not justified and the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Oct 2025 14:14:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779495 ITAT PUNE - AT allowed the taxpayer's appeal, holding that the CIT(A) erred in sustaining an addition for unexplained cash deposits. The tribunal found the assesssee's agricultural income shown in the return was net income, so gross receipts would exceed that figure, and noted a factual arithmetic discrepancy in reported cash deposits. The assessee produced bills totaling about Rs.6,34,147 which neither the AO nor CIT(A) disputed. On these facts, the addition was not justified and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779495