https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789331 Cash seized from employees was treated as unexplained money because the assessee failed to produce contemporaneous bank statements, employee confirmations, acknowledgments, or a day-wise cash trail showing the source and availability of the cash on the relevant date. In the absence of primary and corroborative evidence, the burden under section 69A was not discharged, and the addition was sustained. The challenge to the reassessment proceedings also failed because the reopening was based on requisition under section 132A, and no independent legal defect in the reassessment process was established. en-us Fri, 06 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Apr 2026 07:48:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789331 Cash seized from employees was treated as unexplained money because the assessee failed to produce contemporaneous bank statements, employee confirmations, acknowledgments, or a day-wise cash trail showing the source and availability of the cash on the relevant date. In the absence of primary and corroborative evidence, the burden under section 69A was not discharged, and the addition was sustained. The challenge to the reassessment proceedings also failed because the reopening was based on requisition under section 132A, and no independent legal defect in the reassessment process was established. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789331