https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782286 ITAT Kolkata allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the addition made u/s 69A for cash deposits during the demonetization period. It held that the cash deposits were already recorded as business receipts in the regular books of account, which had been accepted by the AO and CIT(A) without rejection. Since the corresponding profit had been offered to tax, treating the same cash as unexplained money u/s 69A resulted in impermissible double taxation. The Tribunal further held that s. 69A applies only to unexplained assets not recorded in the books, which was not the case here. The order of CIT(A) was set aside. en-us Wed, 30 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782286 ITAT Kolkata allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the addition made u/s 69A for cash deposits during the demonetization period. It held that the cash deposits were already recorded as business receipts in the regular books of account, which had been accepted by the AO and CIT(A) without rejection. Since the corresponding profit had been offered to tax, treating the same cash as unexplained money u/s 69A resulted in impermissible double taxation. The Tribunal further held that s. 69A applies only to unexplained assets not recorded in the books, which was not the case here. The order of CIT(A) was set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782286