https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782610 ITAT Delhi dismissed the Revenue's appeal challenging deletion of addition u/s 68 on cash deposits during the demonetization period. The AO had treated the deposits as unexplained, relying on an alleged abnormal increase in cash sales. CIT(A), after considering available records, accepted the assessee's explanation based on substantial opening cash balance and contemporaneous cash sales, and allowed set off accordingly. ITAT held that the evidences relied upon by CIT(A) were already on the assessment record and Rule 46A was not violated. Consequently, the addition u/s 68 was rightly deleted. en-us Wed, 06 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Dec 2025 08:35:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782610 ITAT Delhi dismissed the Revenue's appeal challenging deletion of addition u/s 68 on cash deposits during the demonetization period. The AO had treated the deposits as unexplained, relying on an alleged abnormal increase in cash sales. CIT(A), after considering available records, accepted the assessee's explanation based on substantial opening cash balance and contemporaneous cash sales, and allowed set off accordingly. ITAT held that the evidences relied upon by CIT(A) were already on the assessment record and Rule 46A was not violated. Consequently, the addition u/s 68 was rightly deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 06 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782610