https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779971 ITAT (Lucknow) upheld the AO's addition of Rs.1,08,99,338 u/s 68 for unexplained cash deposits, while confirming acceptance of Rs.9,58,662 as genuine bank deposits. The Tribunal noted CIT(A) failed to record examination of books or consider Rule 46A, and rejected the assessee's explanations for the large balance. However, the AT sustained CIT(A)'s acceptance of Rs.80,000 as accumulated household savings and Rs.20,000 as a gift from the father, finding both claims reasonable. en-us Thu, 09 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Oct 2025 08:30:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779971 ITAT (Lucknow) upheld the AO's addition of Rs.1,08,99,338 u/s 68 for unexplained cash deposits, while confirming acceptance of Rs.9,58,662 as genuine bank deposits. The Tribunal noted CIT(A) failed to record examination of books or consider Rule 46A, and rejected the assessee's explanations for the large balance. However, the AT sustained CIT(A)'s acceptance of Rs.80,000 as accumulated household savings and Rs.20,000 as a gift from the father, finding both claims reasonable. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779971