SUMAN LATA LAMBA,HARYANA vs. ITO WARD 4, HISAR

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

It is noticed at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned lower authorities have made section 68 unexplained cash credit addition of Rs.34,37,889/- in the assessee’s hands which represents her cash deposits during demonetization, in assessment order dated 31.12.2019 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

Suman Lata Lamba 4. Learned counsel vehemently submits in this factual backdrop that the assessee’s regular business activity i.e. an Indian Oil Corporation dealer running a petrol pump, has nowhere been disputed in both the lower proceedings. And also that her stand all along has attributed to the source of the impugned cash deposits to realization of varying sums against outstanding sundry debtor as well. The facts however remains that the assessee has not been able to plead and prove all the foregoing facts to the entire satisfaction of both the learned lower authorities for the purpose of reconciliation and verification of her sundry debtors vis-à-vis cash deposits. It is thus appropriate in the larger interest of justice that a lump sum addition of Rs.1,00,000/- only would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

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. The assessee is accordingly directed to be assessed under normal provisions only.