https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793085 Revision under section 264 of the Income-tax Act could not be used to place the assessee in a worse position than before, so the Assessing Officer could not enhance the cash-deposit addition in the set-aside proceedings. On the facts, cash savings from salary received over successive years was treated as a reasonable explanation for the demonetisation-period deposits, and the section 69A addition was deleted. A second appeal for the same assessment year and identical controversy was treated as a duplicate filing and dismissed as not maintainable. en-us Fri, 08 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Jun 2026 07:50:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793085 Revision under section 264 of the Income-tax Act could not be used to place the assessee in a worse position than before, so the Assessing Officer could not enhance the cash-deposit addition in the set-aside proceedings. On the facts, cash savings from salary received over successive years was treated as a reasonable explanation for the demonetisation-period deposits, and the section 69A addition was deleted. A second appeal for the same assessment year and identical controversy was treated as a duplicate filing and dismissed as not maintainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 08 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793085