Thread by @sujit_bangar

Ramzan runs a small electronics shop in Karnataka.

During demonetisation, he deposited ₹20.99 lakh into his bank.

The tax department treated this as black money and told him to pay tax at 77%.

Here's how ITAT saved him 🧵👇

[1] Meet Ramzan

Ramzan Mulla runs 'New Charandas Electricals & Engineers'.

A small electronics shop in Vijayapura, Karnataka.

For FY17, he filed his ITR under Section 44AD.

That means presumptive taxation. No detailed books required.

[2] When demonetisation hit

November 2016. Demonetisation hit India overnight.

Ramzan continued his cash business through the permitted window.

His elderly relatives (no bank accounts) gave him their old notes too.

He deposited everything into his bank.

[3] The deposits, broken down

Total cash deposits during demonetisation: ₹20.99 lakh.

🔸 ₹8.73 lakh from his business (cash sales)

🔸 ₹12.26 lakh from elderly relatives (their old notes) Sources documented through VAT returns and affidavits.

[4] What the tax officer alleged

Tax officer's view was harsh:

🔸 You can't deposit your relatives' money in your account

🔸 You weren't authorised to accept old notes from buyers

🔸 Entire ₹20.99 lakh treated as 'unexplained money' u/s 69A

[5] What CIT(A) did on appeal

On first appeal, CIT(A) gave partial relief:

🔸 Accepted only 50% of business deposits as genuine

🔸 Confirmed the other 50% as 'unexplained'

🔸 Confirmed all ₹12.26 lakh from relatives as 'unexplained' too

[6] Ramzan's defense at ITAT

Ramzan stood firm:

🔸 I'm a small dealer. All sales are in cash. Always have been.

🔸 My VAT returns are on record with the state government

🔸 My elderly relatives gave me their notes. Affidavits on record.

[7] How Section 44AD helped his case

Section 44AD is small-taxpayer relief:

🔸 No detailed books required under Sec 44AA

🔸 Tax declared on a presumed basis (8% or 6% digital)

🔸 But Sec 69A can still apply if deposits aren't substantiated

[8] The principle on burden of proof

Well-settled principle on cash credits:

🔸 Once identity and source are explained, primary burden is done

🔸 Burden then shifts to the tax department to disprove

🔸 Tax officer can't reject explanations on surmise alone

[9] What ITAT decided on business deposits

On the ₹8.73 lakh business deposits:

🔸 VAT returns accepted by the state government are evidence

🔸 Sales register matched the deposits

🔸 CIT(A) had no basis for 50% addition. Full amount: DELETED.

[10] What ITAT decided on relatives' deposits

On the ₹12.26 lakh from relatives:

🔸 Affidavits from relatives were undisputed by tax officer

🔸 Aged relatives without bank accounts is a plausible explanation

🔸 No contrary evidence brought. ₹12.26 lakh: DELETED.

[11] Full result

ITAT Bangalore (03 March 2026):

🔸 Entire ₹20.99 lakh addition: DELETED

🔸 Both lower orders (AO and CIT(A)) set aside

🔸 Appeal allowed in full. A complete win for Ramzan.

[12] Important disclaimer

🔸 This is an ITAT ruling on specific facts; appealable to HC

🔸 Sec 44AD provides a computation scheme; Sec 69A can still apply

🔸 Consult your tax advisor for your specific situation

Like the content?

Follow me (@Sujit_Bangar) for more on personal taxation.

Share the first tweet to spread awareness.