TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1228
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct" in short) arising out of the order dated 30.12.2021 u/s. 271B of the Act and order dated 15.12.2019 u/s. 144 of the Act for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. First we take up the appeal in ITA No. 7825/Del/2025 for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and has not filed the return of income for the year under appeal. It was observed that huge cash was deposited in the bank account in Specified Bank Notes (SBN) during the demonetization period and, therefore, the case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny. Thereafter, notice u/s. 143(2) was issued followed by the notices u/s. 142(1) of the Act from time to time along with questionnaires. The assessee finally filed the return of income on 30.07.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A). National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in law and on facts in passing Penalty Order without considering that Assessment Order passed without independent application of mind, without cross examination of facts. 3. That on the facts and circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in dismissing appeal filed against the penalty order by Assessing Officer under section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by ignoring the facts the 271B not applicable to Appellant. 4. That on the facts and circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in dismissing appeal ignoring that Ld. Assessing officer passed penalty order under section 271A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ials available on record. It is observed that Ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay of 1551 days in filing the appeal before him for which explanation was given by the assessee of Covid Pandemic and, thereafter due to natural calamity of flood in his e village where his house was got damaged. However, the ld. CIT(A) has not treated it as a reasonable and sufficient cause and dismissed the appeal as not admissible. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order in Suo Moto Writ Petition in SMW(C) No. 03/2022 has extended the period of limitation falling under Covid-19 period, till 31.05.2022 due to Covid pandemic. Further it was stated by the assessee that his entire family was effected by the Covid and was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....such estimation was less than the income declared by the assessee therefore no addition was made. However, while computing the tax liability of the assessee, tax at the special rate as provided u/s. 115BBE of the Act was charged. From the assessment order, it is observed that nowhere in the order any satisfaction was recorded that the income was assessed by taking recourse of section 68 or 69 and thus provisions of section 115BB cannot be invoked. Moreover, the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of SMILE Microfinance Ltd. v. ACIT in WP(MD) No. 2078 of 2020 & 1742 of 2020 dated 19.11.2024 (Mad.) has already settled this issue and held that Section 115BBE applies from AY 2018-19 and onwards. Recently the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccordingly. 9. Thus, by following the aforesaid judgements of hon'ble high courts, considering the fact that the year under appeal before us is AY 2017-18 thus, we are of the view that the provision of section 115BBE of the Act are not applicable for AY 2017-18 and are applicable from AY 2018-19 and onwards. Therefore, we direct the AO to charge the tax at normal rate of tax. The ground of appeal No. 3 of the assessee is thus allowed. 10. Ground No. 4 with respect to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271A and 271B which is premature in nature thus, dismissed. 11. In the result, the appeal in ITA No. 7824/De/2025 is partly allowed. ITA No. 7825/Del/2025 12. The brief facts of the case are that AO has levied the penalty u/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o appreciate the circumstances as stated above and hold that the assessee has not made out of a case of reasonable cause and thus not condoned the delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Looking to the entirety of the facts, we are of the view that the assessee has been able to successfully demonstrated that he has sufficient and reasonable cause for delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) by 958 days. Further if the period of Covid-19 Pandamic as has been directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition in SMW(C) No. 03/2022 is excluded, and further the period covered due to the natural calamity of the flood in the native village of the assessee is considered, the remaining period of delay could be condoned.....