Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date

Section 115BBE is prospective held by the Supreme Court

DEVKUMAR KOTHARI
Section 115BBE of Income Tax Act Applies Prospectively from 2013-14, Not Retrospectively, Supreme Court Clarifies The Supreme Court ruled that Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act is prospective, not retrospective. This decision arose from a case involving the Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur and an individual, concerning the deduction of losses due to confiscated goods. The court concluded that Section 115BBE, introduced by the Finance Act 2012 and effective from the assessment year 2013-14, cannot be applied to earlier assessment years, such as 1989-1990. This ruling clarifies that Section 115BBE applies only to additions made under sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C from the specified date onwards. (AI Summary)

Section 115BBE is prospective  held by the  Supreme Court

Case   under study:

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JAIPUR VERSUS PRAKASH CHAND LUNIA (D) THR. LRS. & ANR. - 2023 (4) TMI 1057 - SUPREME COURT

The above case concerned with provisions related to business income and allowable expenses and losses. Particular issue was deduction of loss due to confiscation of goods (silver bars  in this case) by DRI officials.

The addition was made under section 69A as assessee was unable to explain the source of acquisition of silver bars. The value of such bars was not recorded in books of account. Therefore addition was made under section 69A and Section 115BBE was also applied to levy higher rate of tax.

Assessee claimed loss due to confiscation.

The above two issues are not covered in this article and the scope of this article is only about nature of provisions of S. 115BBE – whether prospective or retrospective.

On the aspect of applicability of  section 115BBE  the Supreme Court observed and  held as follows in ultimate para 27 of the reported judgment:

 “ 27. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am inclined to hold that the appeal of the Revenue deserves to be allowed, though conscious of the fact that Section 115BBE of the Act may not have an application to the case on hand being prospective in nature. Accordingly, the judgment & order dated 22.11.2016 passed in DBITA No. 96/2003 & DBITR No. 6/1996 by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur stand [PRAKASH CHANDRA LUNIA VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD II, AJMER - 2017 (1) TMI 173 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT]

Unquote:

In  view of above judgment it can be concluded that in case of addition u.s. 69A , S.115BBE can be invoked. In fact S. 115BBE can be invoked in case of additions made under sections 68,69,  69A , 69B,  69C

Section 115BBE was inserted  vide Finance Act, 2012, w.e.f. 01-04-2013 that is assessment year 2013-14.

Therefore,  S.115BBE is not applicable in the assessment Year 1989-1990 covered in  the reported case under study.

The observations of the Supreme Court  “, though conscious of the fact thatSection 115BBE of the Act may not have an application to the case on hand being prospective in nature.”

Declare law and is binding on all courts in India.

Search n this website at

&date1=&date2=&Law=17&Provision=115BBE&court=&city=&landmark=0&excl_text=&year=

&volume=&page_no=&search_in=Cases&TMI_ID=

with law Inome tax

S.115BBE

Search Text:prospective

Include Text:not retrospective

Author found 22 records. Including the case under study.

Now on the prospective or retrospective issue  there should not be dispute by the revenue. and provisions of S.115BBE should not be applied in earlier assessment years prior to AY 2013-14 and amendment to S.115BBE should also be considered prospective.

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles