Narender Kumar vs Income Tax Officer

This assessee’s/alleged legal heir’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1084409801(1) dated 05.01.2026, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant raises his sole substantive ground in the instant appeal that both the lower authorities have erred in law in treating his credits/ deposits amounting to Rs. 16 lacs as explained onl y to the extent of Rs. 8 lacs, as per the CIT(A) lower appellate discussion.

That being the case, learned counsel has invited the tribunal’s attention to page no. 80-82 of the case records indicating the assessee having purchased gym equipments of Rs. 4 lacs i.e. machinery and labour charges, installation charges etc. amounting to Rs. 10.80 lacs which are stated to have been sold in the impugned assessment year. He further claims credit of past savings of Rs. 5 lacs. It is reiterated that the CIT(A) lower appellate discussion has accepted his claim in principle while restricting his impugned addition to the extent of Rs. 8 lacs.

Faced with this situation, I find merit in the instant sole substantive ground and in these factual background of the case, it is deemed just and proper in the larger interest of justice to sustain a lumpsum addition Rs. 1 lakh in the hands of the assessee with a rider that the same shall not be a precedent. The assessee gets relief of Rs. 7 lakhs in other words. Necessary computation shall follow.

So far as the assessee’s assessment u/s 115BBE is concerned, case law SMILE Microfinance Ltd. Vs. AC IT, W.P. (MD) No. 2078 of 2020 & 1742 of 2020 dated 19.11.2024 (Mad.) has settled the issue against the department that the impugned statutory provisions would come into effect on the transaction done on or after 01.04.2017. The assessee accordingl y directed not to be assessed u/s 115BBE of the Act in very terms.

This assessee’s appeal is partl y allowed.