Section 69A deleted

This ruling reinforces the evidentiary discipline required under Section 69A. The Tribunal held that where the assessee provides complete documentation, bank statements, source of funds, and identity of parties, the primary onus stands discharged. 

It rejected the arbitrary approach of the CIT(A) in selectively accepting some credits while rejecting others without cogent reasoning. The decision emphasizes that consistency in evaluation of evidence is critical and that mere assertions of lack of creditworthiness, without rebuttal of documentary proof, cannot justify additions. 

The ruling strengthens taxpayer protection against ad hoc and inconsistent assessments in unexplained money cases.