https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788462 Cash deposited during the demonetisation period was examined against the assessee's cash flow statement, bank withdrawal record and claimed business receipts from stitching, embroidery and pressing. The Tribunal found the cash flow incomplete, held that purchase invoices without supporting sales or job-work evidence did not prove generation of the cash, and noted that credible proof of third-party withdrawals or regular customer records was not produced. It accepted only past savings to a limited extent and treated the balance as unexplained cash credit under Section 69A, with consequential tax implications under Section 115BBE. The addition of Rs. 5,00,000 was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 06 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Mar 2026 14:46:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788462 Cash deposited during the demonetisation period was examined against the assessee's cash flow statement, bank withdrawal record and claimed business receipts from stitching, embroidery and pressing. The Tribunal found the cash flow incomplete, held that purchase invoices without supporting sales or job-work evidence did not prove generation of the cash, and noted that credible proof of third-party withdrawals or regular customer records was not produced. It accepted only past savings to a limited extent and treated the balance as unexplained cash credit under Section 69A, with consequential tax implications under Section 115BBE. The addition of Rs. 5,00,000 was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788462