HARMONY FOREX AND TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6013/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 July 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged that the cash deposits were likely from available cash in hand, including bank withdrawals and cash sales from foreign currency exchange. While not fully reconciled, the Tribunal reduced the sustained addition to Rs. 2,00,000, granting the assessee relief of Rs. 14,88,000.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Forex Dealer, made cash deposits of Rs. 25,88,000 during demonetization. The Assessing Officer treated the entire amount as unexplained income under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE. The CIT(A) confirmed an addition of Rs. 16,88,000.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits made by a Forex Dealer during demonetization are entirely unexplained income, and the applicability of Section 115BBE to transactions before April 1, 2017.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 08.07.2026Pronounced: 08.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No. 6013/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18

HARMONY FOREX AND TRAVELS Vs ITO, WARD 1(3), PVT. LTD., I.P. ESTATE, A-261, UGF, MEERA BAGH, NEW DELHI PASCHIM VIHAR, NEW DELHI-110087 (PAN: AAOCA0031G) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Nirmal Nangia, Sr. DR.

Date of Hearing: 08.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 08.07.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s Order dated 19.03.2026, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the

Act”). 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

It is noticed that during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that out of entire cash deposits of Rs. 25,88,000/-, during demonetization period, as

2 unexplained u/s. 69A read with section 115BBE of the Act.

However, Ld. CIT(A) gave the relief of Rs. 9,00,000/- by

confirming the addition of Rs. 16,88,000/-. The Revenue could

hardly dispute the clinching fact that the CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed

discussions of his order that the assessee is a Forex Dealer and

engaged in the business of money changer by exchange foreign

currency. That being the case, it could be safely concluded that the

impugned cash deposits were out of available cash in hand and

source of such cash in hand was withdrawal from banks and cash

sales on foreign currency, although not satisfactorily reconciled,

prima facie represent the assessee’s income wherein cash component

could not be altogether denied. It is thus deemed appropriate in the

larger interest of justice to restrict the impugned sustained addition

of 16,88,000/- to a lumsum figure of Rs. 2,00,000/- only with a rider

that the same shall not be treated as precedent. The Assessee gets

relief of Rs. 14,88,000/- in very terms. Necessary computation shall

follow as per law.

4.

So far as the assessee’s assessment u/s 115BBE is concerned,

Hon’ble Madras High Court in SMILE Microfinance Ltd. Vs. ACIT,

W.P. (MD) No. 2078 of 2020 & 1742 of 2020 dated 19.11.2024

3 (Mad.) has already settled the issue against the department that the law applies to the transaction on or after 01.04.2017 only. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms. 5. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 08/07/2026.

Sd/- (Satbeer Singh Godara) Judicial Member Dated: 28/07/2026 SR BHATNAGAR Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →