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 : ITAT Chandigarh held that cash deposits during demonetization could not be treated as unexplained income since the amounts were re...
Income Tax : The ITAT Amritsar reduced additions on unexplained cash deposits after considering that the assessee and his wife were senior citi...
Income Tax : The ITAT Bangalore condoned a 28-day delay in filing appeal after accepting the assessee’s explanation regarding non-noticing of...
Income Tax : The ITAT Rajkot reduced the addition on demonetization cash deposits after finding that the assessee had produced land records, ca...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that effective opportunity of hearing was not provided before passing ex parte assessment and appellate orders. Th...
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 Tribunal held that cash deposits could not be fully treated as undisclosed when income was declared under section 44AD. The key takeaway is acceptance of presumptive business income.
The Tribunal held that demonetization-period cash deposits were supported by agricultural income evidence. The section 68 addition was deleted after accepting bills, vouchers, and landholding details.
Recent reforms in gold, land, and PAN tracking hint at a structured buildup toward another demonetisation. The key takeaway is a tighter, more traceable system designed to close 2016-era loopholes.
The Tribunal restricted additions on demonetization-era cash deposits where books were audited and not rejected. Only a nominal amount was sustained to balance equity.
The Tribunal upheld deletion of additions where cash sales during demonetisation were backed by invoices, VAT payments, and statutory records. Statistical suspicion alone cannot override credible primary evidence.
The dispute involved taxability of large cash deposits made during demonetisation. The appellate authority granted relief for deposits in regular notes while sustaining the balance as unexplained income. The Tribunal upheld this approach, finding it consistent with law and facts.
The Tribunal held that cash deposited during demonetisation was supported by evidence of cash sales and debtor collections. Once the source was substantiated, addition under Section 68 was unsustainable.
The Tribunal clarified that the law does not permit selective or partial rejection of books under Section 145(3). In absence of specific defects, additions based on probabilities alone were set aside.
While sales proceeds were claimed as the source, unexplained cash receipts appeared in the cash book. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine deposits after detailed verification of records.
The addition was sustained on the ground that earlier cash deposits were not explained. The Tribunal held that the explanation of medical exigency and redeposit was reasonable and directed deletion.
