Sneh Kansal vs Income Tax Officer

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18 arises against the Addl./JC IT(A)- 2, Lucknow’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/ S/250/2025-26/1084276490(1) dated 31.12.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the p arties at length. Case file perused.

The assessee/appellant herein raises her solitary substantive ground directed against the CIT(A)’s action partly upho lding the assessment findings treating her entire cash deposits of Rs.13,60,000/- as unexplained; to the tune of Rs.11,10,000/- in the lower appellate discussion.

It is in this factual backdrop that the learned counsel has filed the assessee’s cash flow statement indicating her cash withdrawals from her bank amounting to Rs.8,77 ,000/- whose credit has nowhere been considered in both the learned lower authorities’ respective findings. Her further claim hav ing accumulated past savings keeping in mind her socio eco nomic status has also not been g iven e ither in the asse ssme nt order or in the lower appellate discussion. It is thus deemed in these peculiar facts that a lump sum addition of Rs.1,0 0,000/- only would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. The assessee gets further relief of Rs.10,10,000/- in other words.

So far as assessee’s assessment under Section 115BBE is concerned, I quote S.M.I.L.E Microfinance Limited Vs. The ACIT CC-1 in W .P.(MD) No.2078 of 2020 & W.M.P. (MD) No. 1742 of 2020 held that the said provision applied for transactions done on or after 01.04.2017 only. The assessee is accordingly directed to be assessed under normal provisions only.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court o n 17/03/2026.