https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784311 The dominant issue was whether abnormal cash deposits during the demonetization period could be treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. The ITAT held that the AO's method for determining closing stock, used to infer insufficient stock and disbelieve cash sales, was improper, and that the appellate authority erred in sustaining the addition without appreciating record facts. Accepting the assessee's stock and trading chart as reliable, and noting that trading results already reflected direct expenses and gross profit, the ITAT found sufficient stock to support the impugned cash sales; consequently, the u/s 68 addition was deleted and the assessee's grounds were allowed. en-us Mon, 13 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Dec 2025 18:06:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784311 The dominant issue was whether abnormal cash deposits during the demonetization period could be treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. The ITAT held that the AO's method for determining closing stock, used to infer insufficient stock and disbelieve cash sales, was improper, and that the appellate authority erred in sustaining the addition without appreciating record facts. Accepting the assessee's stock and trading chart as reliable, and noting that trading results already reflected direct expenses and gross profit, the ITAT found sufficient stock to support the impugned cash sales; consequently, the u/s 68 addition was deleted and the assessee's grounds were allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784311