SUVIDHI INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 24(4), DELHI

It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee / appellant herein is aggrieved against both the lower authorities action treating his cash deposits during demonetization amounting to Rs.32,97,896/- as unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 of the Act, in assessment order dated 26.12.2019 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 4. The tribunal hereby notices in this factual backdrop that even the lower authorities are fair enough in not disputing the clinching facts that the assessee/ a company, is engaged in scarp business; including Ferrous and Non-Ferrous metals, wherein cash sale and purchases in such an un-organized sector could not be all together ruled out. The fact however remains that the assessee has not been able to plead and prove all the relevant facts reconciling its business turnover and cash deposit in both the lower proceedings. It is thus deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice that a lump sum addition of Rs.3 lacs only would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. The assessee gets relief of Rs. 29,97,896/- lacs in very terms. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. 5. 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