MANOJ KUMAR,FARIDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Mumbai’s DIN & order No.
ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1070020473(1) dated 29.10.2024, 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.
A perusal of the case file reveals that both the learned lower authorities have treated the assessee’s cash deposits of Rs.7,40,000/- as unexplained, in the course of assessment dated 15.12.2019 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. That being the case, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute the fact that the assessee already stands assessed u/s 44AD for having derived profits from sale of Manoj Kumar 2 building material etc. The facts also remains that he has not satisfactorily discharged his onus of proving source of the impugned cash deposits all along before the learned lower authorities. Be that as it may, it is deemed appropriate the assessee’s socio economic status, he could be safely held to have accumulated past savings of Rs.6,00,000/- in these peculiar facts; and, therefore, a further addition of Rs.1,40,000/- only would be just and proper in the larger interest of justice. The assessee gets relief of Rs.6,00,000/- in other words. Ordered accordingly.
So far as assessee’s assessment under Section 115BBE is concerned, we 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.
This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 27/05/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)
Judicial Member
Dated: 27/05/2025
*Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*