https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783079 ITAT held that addition u/s 68 on cash deposited during demonetization was unjustified where the assessee was engaged in regular business and the cash deposits emanated from recorded business activities. It was observed that cash sales, including making charges embedded in the jewellery rate, were duly reflected in the books and subjected to tax. The mere inability to furnish buyers' addresses does not attract s.68, nor justify invoking s.115BBE, when sales are otherwise recorded and plausible. As the AO had rejected the books yet accepted ongoing business, the natural inference favored business receipts. ITAT directed deletion of the addition and allowed the assessee's appeal. en-us Thu, 04 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Dec 2025 16:56:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783079 ITAT held that addition u/s 68 on cash deposited during demonetization was unjustified where the assessee was engaged in regular business and the cash deposits emanated from recorded business activities. It was observed that cash sales, including making charges embedded in the jewellery rate, were duly reflected in the books and subjected to tax. The mere inability to furnish buyers' addresses does not attract s.68, nor justify invoking s.115BBE, when sales are otherwise recorded and plausible. As the AO had rejected the books yet accepted ongoing business, the natural inference favored business receipts. ITAT directed deletion of the addition and allowed the assessee's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 04 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783079