https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786537 Cash deposits made during the demonetisation period were treated as explained where they arose from recorded sales, were reflected in audited books of account, and the books were not rejected or shown to contain defects. The absence of any abnormal spike in deposits, together with acceptance of the turnover by the Commercial Tax Department, supported the conclusion that section 69A could not apply because the foundational requirement of unrecorded money was missing. On that basis, mere deposit of specified bank notes did not justify an unexplained-money addition, and the addition under section 69A was deleted. en-us Wed, 07 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Feb 2026 15:38:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786537 Cash deposits made during the demonetisation period were treated as explained where they arose from recorded sales, were reflected in audited books of account, and the books were not rejected or shown to contain defects. The absence of any abnormal spike in deposits, together with acceptance of the turnover by the Commercial Tax Department, supported the conclusion that section 69A could not apply because the foundational requirement of unrecorded money was missing. On that basis, mere deposit of specified bank notes did not justify an unexplained-money addition, and the addition under section 69A was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 07 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786537