https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783882 Whether cash deposited by the directors and then transferred to the assessee for share purchase could be assessed as unexplained cash credit under s. 68 was the dominant issue. The Tribunal held that the AO and CIT(A)/NFAC proceeded on suspicion by treating the directors' salary income as determinative without examining their prior savings/capital accumulation, and the first appellate order amounted to an arbitrary "summary dismissal" without requisite inquiry; consequently, the addition could not be sustained. The Tribunal further held that, on the admitted facts, the case (if at all) concerned "unexplained money" in the directors' cash deposits, attracting s. 69A rather than s. 68, evidencing non-application of mind; the impugned addition under s. 68 was deleted and the appeal allowed. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Dec 2025 07:51:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783882 Whether cash deposited by the directors and then transferred to the assessee for share purchase could be assessed as unexplained cash credit under s. 68 was the dominant issue. The Tribunal held that the AO and CIT(A)/NFAC proceeded on suspicion by treating the directors' salary income as determinative without examining their prior savings/capital accumulation, and the first appellate order amounted to an arbitrary "summary dismissal" without requisite inquiry; consequently, the addition could not be sustained. The Tribunal further held that, on the admitted facts, the case (if at all) concerned "unexplained money" in the directors' cash deposits, attracting s. 69A rather than s. 68, evidencing non-application of mind; the impugned addition under s. 68 was deleted and the appeal allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783882