Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2025) 12 ITAT CK 4507

M/s Babaji Udyog vs ACIT, Circle-43(1), Delhi

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi · Decided on 24 December 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member
RESULT
Partly Allowed
CASE NUMBER
ITA No. 7958/Del/2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 340 words

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

This assessee’s appeal ITA no. 7958/Del/2025 for assessment year 2017-18 arises against CIT(A)-29, New Delhi’s order dated 16.09.2025 [Case No. CIT(A), delhi-15/10607/2019-20 – DR No. 247/71], in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It transpires during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ respective findings treating it’s cash deposits during demonetization amounting to Rs. 49,48,190/- as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, in assessment order dated 23.12.2019 & upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

3.

That being the case, this tribunal finds from a perusal of the case records that the assessee is engaged in mustard oil wholesale and retail business wherein possibility of predominant cash sales in such an unorganized edible oil sector could not be altogether ruled out. The fact also remains that the assessee has not satisfactorily discharged its onus to prove the source of the impugned cash deposits to the entire satisfaction of both the learned lower authorities. Be that as it may, it is thus deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice that a lump sum GP estimation of 5% in such regular business sales in the assessee’s hands is deemed as just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. Ordered accordingly.

4.

So far as the assessee’s assessment u/s 115BBE is concerned, the revenue could hardly dispute that hon’ble Madras high court in SMILE Microfinance Ltd. v. ACIT in WP(MD) No. 2078 of 2020 & 1742 of 2020 dated 19.11.2024 (Mad.) has already settled the issue that Section 115BBE applies on transactions on or after 01.04.2017 only. I, accordingly direct the Assessing Officer to finalize the consequential computation under normal provisions than u/s 115BBE of the Act in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal ITA No. 7958/Del/2025 is partly allowed in very terms.