TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the delay in filing the appeal could be condoned. (ii) Whether the cash deposit addition treated as unexplained under section 68 was liable to be sustained in full. (iii) Whether section 115BBE applied to the impugned transaction.
Issue (i): Whether the delay in filing the appeal could be condoned.
Analysis: The appeal was filed with substantial delay, but the explanation offered was accepted as arising from circumstances beyond the assessee's control. The delay was therefore treated as satisfactorily explained.
Conclusion: The delay was condoned in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the cash deposit addition treated as unexplained under section 68 was liable to be sustained in full.
Analysis: The assessee was engaged in trading of electronic items and had a prior year cash-deposit pattern that lent support to the explanation that the impugned deposits represented cash sales and cash in hand. On the facts, the full addition was found to be excessive, and only a lump sum addition was considered appropriate.
Conclusion: The addition was restricted substantially and relief was granted to the assessee for the balance amount.
Issue (iii): Whether section 115BBE applied to the impugned transaction.
Analysis: The provision was held to apply only to transactions occurring on or after 01.04.2017. As the assessment year and transaction period were prior thereto, the assessee could not be subjected to taxation under that special regime.
Conclusion: The assessee was directed to be assessed under the normal provisions and not under section 115BBE.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only in part, with the major addition substantially reduced and the special taxation regime found inapplicable to the transaction.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 115BBE applies only to income arising from transactions on or after its commencement date, and where the explanation for cash deposits is not fully disproved, the addition may be restricted on a reasonable estimate.
TaxTMI 
