https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784309 Where cash deposits during demonetization were added as unexplained cash credit under s.68 on the allegation of inflated sales, the Tribunal held that turnover had already been disclosed in the VAT return for October 2016, negating any inference of post-facto manipulation. The deposits were reconciled with cash availability recorded in the cash book, and the AO neither disputed the cash book, stock position/stock statements, nor the underlying sales. Treating recorded cash arising from accepted sales as unexplained would implicitly require a corresponding reduction in sales or rejection of stock, which was not done. The s.68 addition was held unsustainable and was directed to be deleted; the appeal was allowed. en-us Fri, 22 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Dec 2025 18:54:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784309 Where cash deposits during demonetization were added as unexplained cash credit under s.68 on the allegation of inflated sales, the Tribunal held that turnover had already been disclosed in the VAT return for October 2016, negating any inference of post-facto manipulation. The deposits were reconciled with cash availability recorded in the cash book, and the AO neither disputed the cash book, stock position/stock statements, nor the underlying sales. Treating recorded cash arising from accepted sales as unexplained would implicitly require a corresponding reduction in sales or rejection of stock, which was not done. The s.68 addition was held unsustainable and was directed to be deleted; the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784309