NEELAM GUPTA,KAROL BAGH DELHI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, DELHI

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee/ appellant is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities respective findings treating his cash deposits during demonetization amounting to Rs.16.99 lac as unexplained u/s. 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, in assessment order framed on 07.05.2023 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 4. It is evident from the case records that the assessee is admittedly engaged in sale and trading of inventors and other similar appliances as per the return submitted on record wherein possibility of cash sales and turnover; although not entirely before learned lower authorities, could not be ruled out as well. It is thus appropriate in these peculiar facts that GP component @ 10% of the impugned cash deposits of Rs.16.99 lacs would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Ordered accordingly.

So far as assessee’s assessment under Section 115BBE is concerned, I 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. 6. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 24/09/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)