CHOGALAL PRAKASH CHANDRA,NEEMUCH vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NEEMUCH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the explanation and supporting documents (pages 40-41 of the paper book) required verification by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for a detailed inquiry.
What were the facts?
The assessee advanced an unsecured loan of Rs. 7 lakh to M/s UB Investments. The Assessing Officer added this amount to the assessee's income, holding that the sources of this loan were unexplained despite being routed through banking channels. The CIT(A) upheld the addition.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee's explanation for the source of Rs. 7 lakh advanced as an unsecured loan was satisfactory, and if not, whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 250,Section 246A,Section 253
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
Per Paresh M. Joshi, JM:
This is an Appeal filed by the Revenue under section 253 of the Income tax Act 1961, [herein after referred to as the Act
for the sake of brevity] before this tribunal. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order bearing No:-ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-
26/1080411927(1) dated 08.09.2025 passed by the Ld.
CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred as the “Impugned Order”. The Relevant Assessment Year is 2013-
CHOGALAL PRAKASH CHANDRA ITA No. 976/Ind/2025 AY-2013-2014 2014 and the corresponding Previous Period is from 01/04/2012 to 31/03/2013. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX
1 That as and by way of an Assessment Order made u/s 143(3)/147 dated 16/12/2019 the total Income of
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- A.Merchy Clara vs. The Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise (Appeals)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- Nallathambi Thangaraj vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IMadras · 13 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S. Hira Films PVT. LTD. vs. M/S. Prasad Film Labs (Mumbai) Private LimitedBombay · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Jung Bahadur Singh, Through Its Proprietor, Jang Bahadur Singh vs. The Union Of INDIA, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of RevenueJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026