INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI vs. NAVEEN GOEL, DELHI

Shri Manish Aggarwal, appearing on behalf of the assessee at the outset submitted that the Assessing Officer (AO) has made addition invoking the amended provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of SMILE Microfinance Ltd. vs. ACIT, WP (MD) No.2078 of 2022 decided on 19.11.2024 has held that the amended provisions of section 115BBE of the Act would apply from A.Y. 2018-19 onwards. Thus, if the correct provisions of section 115BBE of the Act are applied in the instant case, the appeal filed by the Revenue would not be maintainable on account of low tax effect in light of CBDT Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17.09.2024.

Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the department supported the assessment order and prayed for reversing findings of the CIT(A).

Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The Department is in appeal before the Tribunal on the solitary issue of deletion of addition of Rs.28,30,000/- made u/s 69A of the Act on account of alleged unexplained cash deposits in the bank account during demonetization period. It is an undisputed fact that the AO has made addition u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. The tax effect involved in the present appeal is Rs.60,02,711/-. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of SMILE Microfinance Ltd. vs. ACIT (supra) has held that the amended rate of tax u/s 115BBE of the Act applies from A.Y. 2018-19 onwards. Thus, if the unamended rate of tax is applied in the present appeal, the tax effect would be less than Rs.60,00,000/-. Therefore, in light of CBDT Circular No. 9/2024, the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable on account of low tax effect. Hence, the same is dismissed for aforesaid reason.