MLJJP CHEMICALS LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-16(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 212/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 April 2026AY 2017-184 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the application of Section 115BBE via a rectification order under Section 154 was not permissible. It also noted that Section 115BBE was not applicable for AY 2017-18.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 1,69,00,000/- under Section 68. Subsequently, the AO passed a rectification order under Section 154, invoking Section 115BBE for the assessment year 2017-18.

What were the issues?

Whether Section 115BBE could be applied through a rectification order under Section 154 for AY 2017-18, and if Section 115BBE was applicable for that assessment year.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 154,Section 115BBE,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, C.A. &, Shri J. P. Sharma, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 20.04.2026Pronounced: 20.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 212/Del/2026 (Assessment Year : 2017-18) MLJJP Chemicals Ltd. Vs. DCIT 609, New Delhi House Circle – 16(1), 27, Barakhamba Road C.R. Building New Delhi New Delhi PAN No. AAECM 4013 E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Raj Kumar, C.A. & Shri J. P. Sharma, C.A. Revenue by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 20.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 20.04.2026

ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), addl/JCIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 24.12.2025 arising from the rectification order dated 23.01.2021 passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax – Circle – 16(1), Delhi under Section 154

ITA No. 212/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2017-18] MLJJP Chemicals Ltd. vs. DCIT read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) concerning Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18.

2.

The grounds raised by the assessee are as under : 1. “That under the facts and circumstances Ld. A.O erred in law as well as on merits in applying Sec.115BBE on addition of Rs.1,69,00,000/- made u/s 68 by re-coursing to provisions of sec. 154, which issue cannot be covered within the scope of Sec.154 hence, impugned order is illegal, without jurisdiction and unsustainable in law. 1.1 That as per already settled law as on date, amended Sec.115BBE is not applicable w.e.f A.Y. 2017-18 but only from A.Y. 2018-19, hence, for this reason also, the impugned rectification is unwarranted u/s 154. 2. That even on merits, amended Sec.115BBE is not applicable w.e.f A.Y. 2017-18 hence, the calculations of tax and surcharge as per amended Sec.115BBE is unsustainable in law.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a limited company. Assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed on 27.12.2019 and made an addition of Rs.1,69,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act on returned income of Rs. 83,51,250/- and therefore, income was assessed at Rs.2,52,51,250/-. Thereafter, a rectification order dated 23.01.2021 passed u/s 154 of the Act for A.Y. 2017-18 by the AO wherein the AO invoked the provisions of section 115BBE. 4. Assessee has challenged the application of Section 115BBE of the Act on addition of Rs.1,69,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act under the provision of Section 154 of the Act. 5. At the outset, the learned Counsel of the assessee stated that the same is not covered under the scope of section 154, hence, the

Page 2 of 6

ITA No. 212/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2017-18] MLJJP Chemicals Ltd. vs. DCIT order u/s 154 is invalid. It was further, pointed out by the learned AR that section 115BBE of the act is applicable from A.Y. 2018-19 only. 6. Per contra, learned DR relied on the order of Assessing Officer. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Madras High Court in the Writ petition in the case of S.M.I.L.E. Microfinance Ltd. Vs. ACIT, W.P. (MD) No.2078 of 2020 & 1742 of 2020, dated 19.11.2024 (Madras) has held that the impugned statutory provision would come into effect on the transaction done on or after 01.04.2017 only. Accordingly, we direct the AO to tax the addition under normal provisions of tax and not under the provisions of 115BBE of the Act. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 212/DEL/2026 is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.04.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (NAVEEN CHANDRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date:- 22.04.2026 Priti Yadav, Sr. Ps*

Page 3 of 6

ITA No. 212/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2017-18] MLJJP Chemicals Ltd. vs. DCIT Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

Page 4 of 6

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →