https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779844 ITAT (Raipur) held that the AO erred in recharacterizing unsecured loans as unexplained money under s.69A without examining the lenders; those loan claims were reinstated and the CIT(A)'s favorable findings restored. However, cash deposits of Rs. 150.50 lakhs in SBNs during demonetisation, purportedly from pre-demonetisation bullion sales, were found to be unexplained money under s.69A and sustained. A separate addition of Rs. 85,08,297 for purchases of jewellery was held to be subsumed in the Rs. 150.50 lakhs addition and therefore vacated. en-us Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Oct 2025 10:15:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779844 ITAT (Raipur) held that the AO erred in recharacterizing unsecured loans as unexplained money under s.69A without examining the lenders; those loan claims were reinstated and the CIT(A)'s favorable findings restored. However, cash deposits of Rs. 150.50 lakhs in SBNs during demonetisation, purportedly from pre-demonetisation bullion sales, were found to be unexplained money under s.69A and sustained. A separate addition of Rs. 85,08,297 for purchases of jewellery was held to be subsumed in the Rs. 150.50 lakhs addition and therefore vacated. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779844