<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (2) TMI 1782 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468181</link>
    <description>Cash deposits cannot be treated as unexplained when contemporaneous books, bank statements and jewel pledge records establish a plausible business source, including redemption of jewel loans, prior cash withdrawals and cash accumulation; here, audited records showed no negative cash balance or contrary material, so the addition was deleted. Cash seized during search may also be telescoped against additional interest income already offered where the income represents available business funds and no other source of income is shown; here, the seized cash was consistent with business receipts, so telescoping was allowed and the addition was deleted. The Revenue failed to prove undisclosed income, and the deletions were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 13:24:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=897636" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 1782 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468181</link>
      <description>Cash deposits cannot be treated as unexplained when contemporaneous books, bank statements and jewel pledge records establish a plausible business source, including redemption of jewel loans, prior cash withdrawals and cash accumulation; here, audited records showed no negative cash balance or contrary material, so the addition was deleted. Cash seized during search may also be telescoped against additional interest income already offered where the income represents available business funds and no other source of income is shown; here, the seized cash was consistent with business receipts, so telescoping was allowed and the addition was deleted. The Revenue failed to prove undisclosed income, and the deletions were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468181</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>