https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781776 ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the addition under s. 69A for alleged unexplained cash deposits. It held that both AO and CIT(A)/NFAC failed to conduct proper enquiry or bring any material to dispute that Rs. 5,00,000 was withdrawn by bearer cheque from the assessee's disclosed bank account and redeposited when not required for business. The department itself acknowledged the source as declared income and relied only on suspicion and procedural objections, including rejection of an affidavit without examining its merits, rendering the first appellate order arbitrary and bad in law. en-us Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Nov 2025 08:42:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781776 ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the addition under s. 69A for alleged unexplained cash deposits. It held that both AO and CIT(A)/NFAC failed to conduct proper enquiry or bring any material to dispute that Rs. 5,00,000 was withdrawn by bearer cheque from the assessee's disclosed bank account and redeposited when not required for business. The department itself acknowledged the source as declared income and relied only on suspicion and procedural objections, including rejection of an affidavit without examining its merits, rendering the first appellate order arbitrary and bad in law. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781776