ITAT Delhi Deletes Rs 9.41 Crore Addition on Demonetisation Cash Deposits Holding Suspicion Alone Cannot Justify Addition:

ITAT Delhi Deletes Rs 9.41 Crore Addition on Demonetisation Cash Deposits Holding Suspicion Alone Cannot Justify Addition

The ITAT Delhi has deleted an addition of Rs 9.41 crore made under Section 68 in respect of cash deposits during the demonetization period.

Cash Deposits Backed by Records Cannot be Treated as Unexplained Merely on the Basis of Doubts

authorSaloni KumaridateJun 6, 2026
Last update on Jun 6, 2026
ITAT Delhi Deletes Rs 9.41 Crore Addition on Demonetisation Cash Deposits Holding Suspicion Alone Cannot Justify Addition The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi held that where cash sales were duly recorded in books, supported by stock records and VAT returns, the addition could not be sustained merely on suspicion regarding the timing of sales and deposits.
ITAT Upholds Deletion of Rs 96 Crore Prior Period Disallowance
The assessee is carrying on the bullion and jewellery business and had filed his return declaring an income of Rs 64.93 lakh for Assessment Year 2017-18. The case was selected for scrutiny on account of substantial cash deposits made during the demonetisation period. During November 2016, the assessee deposited cash amounting to Rs 26.89 crore in his bank account, which, according to him, was sourced from cash sales recorded during October 2016 and November 2016.
ITAT Restricts Bogus Purchase Addition to Profit Element Only
The AO observed that the assessee had shown unusually high cash sales of approximately Rs 19.82 crore in October 2016 and Rs 6.88 crore during the first week of November 2016. Consequently, the AO concluded that the assessee had manipulated the books of account and has invoked Sections 68 and 145(3) of the Income Tax Act. The AO treated 35% of the cash deposits, amounting to Rs 9.41 crore, as unexplained cash credits taxable under Section 115BBE.
ITAT Validates Commission Estimation on Funds Routed Through Banking Channels
The CIT(A) upheld the addition. The Tribunal observed that once the existence of stock, sales, and cash balance stood accepted by the Department, the addition could not be sustained merely on the basis of suspicion regarding why the assessee retained cash instead of depositing it immediately in the bank. The Bench emphasized that no crucial corroborative evidence had been brought on record to establish that the cash sales were fictitious or that the assessee manipulated the book of accounts. ITAT held that the addition was based solely on suspicion and not on evidence, the Tribunal deleted the addition in full and allowed the assesse's appeal

About Author

LinkedIn

Saloni Kumari

Content Writer

Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2447
Up Next

Loading suggestions…