Income Tax : The Tribunal held that cash deposits during demonetisation cannot be treated as unexplained when backed by audited books, invoices...
Finance : Recent reforms in gold, land, and PAN tracking hint at a structured buildup toward another demonetisation. The key takeaway is a t...
Income Tax : Discover the implications of a significant Delhi ITAT ruling on cash sales pre-demonetization. Learn how it affects taxation and f...
Income Tax : Explore the impact of demonetization on cash deposits in India and the key legal insights from Section 69A vs. Section 44AD cases....
Fema / RBI : Public can continue to use ₹2000 banknotes for their transactions and also receive them in payment. However, they are encouraged...
CA, CS, CMA : SFIO, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, arrests CA Nalin Prabhat Panchal in Hyderabad for failure to honor summons related to Nityank...
Income Tax : No study on effect of withdrawal of legal tender character of the Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) on Indian economy has been published...
Income Tax : Demonetisation, inter alia, led to detection of black money, increase in tax collection and widening of tax base: Union MoS for Fi...
Fema / RBI : Value of counterfeit notes detected in banking system reduced from ₹43.47 crores in 2016-17 to ₹8.26 crores in 2021-22 since d...
Income Tax : An analysis of the search cases, conducted by Income Tax Department (ITD), involving cash seizures of more than Rs 5 crores in the...
Income Tax : Bangalore ITAT held that cash redeposited during demonetisation could not be treated as unexplained under Section 69A when the ass...
Income Tax : The ITAT ruled that failure to produce confirmations from debtors did not justify additions where sales, ledger accounts, and samp...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits representing recorded business sales could not be treated as unexplained under Section 68 w...
Income Tax : The ITAT Mumbai held that cash deposits during the demonetization period could not be treated as unexplained where the assessee's ...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that cash deposits cannot be treated as unexplained merely because they were made in old denomination notes du...
Fema / RBI : RBI reported that 98.44% of ₹2000 banknotes in circulation have been returned since the withdrawal announcement in May 2023. How...
Fema / RBI : The RBI announced the withdrawal of ₹2000 notes in May 2023. As of Sept 30, 2025, 98.35% of notes are returned. Notes remain leg...
Fema / RBI : RBI provides an update on the withdrawal status of ₹2000 banknotes, with 98% of notes returned by October 31, 2024....
Fema / RBI : RBI has extended deadline for withdrawal of ₹2000 banknotes to October 7, 2023. Learn about new guidelines and arrangements....
Fema / RBI : Reserve Bank of India's decision to withdraw ₹2000 banknotes has been highly effective, with 93% of these notes already returned...
The Agra ITAT held that an independent addition under Section 69A was unsustainable when the AO had accepted the assessee’s declared business income. The Tribunal directed reconsideration of the deposits after evaluating the business receipts.
The Tribunal observed that even in ex parte proceedings, the CIT(A) must adjudicate issues through a speaking order. The matter was remanded while directing the assessee to cooperate.
The ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits during the demonetization period could not be treated as unexplained credits when they originated from duly recorded business sales accepted by the Revenue. The Tribunal upheld deletion of the addition under Section 68.
The Tribunal emphasized that once sales are entered in regular books and supported by stock records, the burden shifts to the Revenue to prove them false. In the absence of such proof, Section 68 could not be invoked.
ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits made during the demonetization period could not be fully treated as unexplained money when supported by sales records and books of account. However, as the assessee failed to satisfactorily explain the abnormal increase in cash sales before demonetization, the Tribunal sustained only a lump-sum addition of ₹10 lakh. The ruling emphasizes balanced evaluation of evidence in demonetization-related assessments.
The ITAT held that cash deposited by a money transfer agent during demonetisation could not be treated as unexplained income when the funds belonged to principal payment service providers. The Tribunal observed that the assessee merely acted as a collection agent and transferred the amounts to the principals.
The ITAT Agra held that the tax authorities failed to consider earlier cash withdrawals while treating demonetization deposits as unexplained. The Tribunal restricted the addition to Rs.1 lakh and granted substantial relief to the assessee.
The ITAT held that cash deposits during demonetisation could not be treated as unexplained when the assessee had disclosed sales and provided debtor details. The Tribunal ruled that taxing the same receipts again under Section 68 would amount to double taxation.
The ITAT Ahmedabad held that demonetisation-related cash deposits cannot be treated as unexplained money merely on suspicion when sales are properly recorded in books. The Tribunal upheld deletion of ₹2.35 crore addition due to absence of defects in evidence.
The Appellate Tribunal held that routing demonetized cash through another person’s bank account and transferring it back constituted a benami transaction under the PBPT Act. The ruling clarified that cash qualifies as “property” and can form the basis of benami proceedings.
