https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781336 ITAT, Ahmedabad allowed the taxpayer's appeal and set aside additions under s.68 treating cash deposits as unexplained. The tribunal found the assessee's reconciliation-showing cash withdrawals exceeding deposits and substantial cash payments for labour-supported by bank statements, Form 26AS and cash books, adequately explaining the deposits. It held CIT(A)'s dismissal without admitting additional evidence under Rule 46A and without considering merits contravened natural justice. On the facts, the source of deposits was reconciled with business transactions, so the addition was unsustainable and was deleted. en-us Tue, 16 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Nov 2025 09:42:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781336 ITAT, Ahmedabad allowed the taxpayer's appeal and set aside additions under s.68 treating cash deposits as unexplained. The tribunal found the assessee's reconciliation-showing cash withdrawals exceeding deposits and substantial cash payments for labour-supported by bank statements, Form 26AS and cash books, adequately explaining the deposits. It held CIT(A)'s dismissal without admitting additional evidence under Rule 46A and without considering merits contravened natural justice. On the facts, the source of deposits was reconciled with business transactions, so the addition was unsustainable and was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781336