RADHA KISHAN GOBIND RAM LIMITED,NORTH WEST DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7000/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Radha Kishan Gobind Ram Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-20(4), C-22-23, Lawrence Road, Delhi Industrial Area, Delhi PAN: AAACR4564K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Vaibhav Aggarwal, CA Department by Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR)

Date of hearing 21.04.2026 Date of pronouncement 13.05.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s order dated 21.08.2025 having DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079810032(1), involving

ITA No.7000/Del/2025

proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2 For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 1 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. We note with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the assessee, a company, engaged in manufacturing and trading of spices, flour and edible oils in the name and style of “Radha Kishan Gobind Ram Ltd.”, had deposited total cash of Rs.81,13,700/- during demonetization which stood added as unexplained under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act to the extent of Rs.72,06,022/- in assessment order dated 23.12.2019 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 4. Both the parties vehemently reiterate their respective stands. The Revenue’s case more particularly in light of Assessing Officer’s detailed discussion is that the assessee has all along failed in pleading and proving the necessary reconciliation and verification

2 | P a g e

ITA No.7000/Del/2025

of his cash deposits vis-à-vis regular business sales recorded in the books of account. 5. The fact also remains that neither the assessee’s aforesaid regular business activity is in dispute nor the nature thereof as involving a highly unorganized sector in manufacturing, wholesale and retail trading, as the case may be. Faced with this situation, we are of the considered view that a lumpsum addition of Rs. 5 lakhs only in the assessee’s hands would meet the ends of justice with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Ordered accordingly. The assessee gets relief of Rs.67,06,022/- in other words. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. 6. So far as assessee’s assessment under section 115BBE is concerned, we quote S.M.I.L.E. Microfinance Ltd. Vs. ACIT, W.P. (MD) No.2078 of 2020 & 1742 of 2020, dated 19.11.2024 (Madras) that the impugned statutory provision would come into effect on the transaction done on or after 01.04.2017 only. The assessee is accordingly directed to be assessed under the normal provision as per law. 7. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13th May, 2026

3 | P a g e

ITA No.7000/Del/2025

Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 13th May, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

4 | P a g e