AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN &Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250-2025-26/1077328370(1) dated 21.06.2025, 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.
Coming to the assessee’s substantive issue raised herein, it transpires during the course of hearing that Ld. lower authorities treated the cash deposits during the demonetization amounting to Rs. 34 lacs as unexplained u/s. 68 of the Act r.w.s. 115 BBE of the Act.
That being the case, there is hardly any dispute between the parties that assessee has been admittedly carrying out the business activity of trading in electronic and electrical items wherein, possibility of such cash could not be altogether ruled out although he has failed to explain the sum in issue to the entire satisfaction of the lower authorities. Thus, it is deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to sustain the lumpsum addition @10% on the assessee’s impugned cash deposits with a rider that the same shall not be a precedent. 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.