POORAN,SHAMLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 3(1)(5),, SHAMLI

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 422 days in filing of instant appeal is hereby condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

It transpires during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned lower authorities’ respective findings have treated the assessee’s cash deposits of Rs.12.32 lakhs as unexplained to the tune of Rs.9,94,040/- under section 115BBE of the Act, in assessment order dated 26.11.2019 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

That being the case, both the learned representatives reiterate their respective stands against and in support of the impugned addition. It is noticed from a perusal of the case records that the impugned cash deposits comprise of the assessee/former’s KCC loan repayment of Rs.9.76 lakhs wherein the necessary presumption which would arise in his favour is that he had redeposited the amount earlier withdrawn from the very account only. The same stands deleted in entirety therefore.

So far as the assessee’s remaining cash deposits of Rs.2,56,000/- in issue are concerned, learned counsel could hardly dispute that although he has proved himself to be an agriculturist

So far as assessee’s assessment under section 115BBE is concerned, I 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.