AHUJA AND ANAND BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6610/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2026AY 2020-216 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that taxing the forfeited loans in AY 2020-21, when they were already offered to tax in AY 2023-24, would result in double taxation. Therefore, the addition made in AY 2020-21 was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee obtained loans in AY 2020-21 which were later forfeited and offered to tax in AY 2023-24. The Assessing Officer made additions for these loans in AY 2020-21.

What were the issues?

Whether additions made for loans in AY 2020-21 are valid when the same loans were forfeited and offered to tax in a subsequent AY, leading to double taxation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD

For Appellant: CA Sh. Jaind Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate, Ms. Shivangi Kumar, Advocate
Hearing: 02.04.2026Pronounced: 15.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.6610/Del/2025 [Assessment Year: 2020-21] Ahuja and Anand Vs. DCIT Buildwell Private Limited Central Circle-1 Plot No.3 & 4, Second Noida Floor, Savitri Bhawan, A Block Market, Preet Vihar, Nirmal Vihar, East Delhi-110092 PAN No.AAGCA0327F Appellant Respondent

Appellant by Sh. Rajiv S Khandelwal, CA Sh. Jaind Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate Ms. Shivangi Kumar, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement 15.05.2026 ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-3, Noida dated 13.08.2025 for the A.Y. 2020-21 in sustaining the additions made u/s.68 of the Act in respect of unsecured loan obtained by the assessee from Bhavishya lnvest Serve Pvt. Ltd. and Nandini Tradex Pvt. Ltd.

2.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits that though the assessee has raised several technical grounds and grounds on merits, the assessee would like to pursue only the grounds on merits of the addition made by the AO i.e. ground Nos. 5 and 6 of grounds of appeal of the assessee. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the assessment year under consideration the assessee had obtained loans of Rs.35,23,010/- from Bhavishya lnvest Serve Pvt. Ltd. and Rs.1,66,02,685/- from Nandini Tradex Pvt. Ltd. It is submitted that the assessee forfeited these loans and offered to tax in the A.Y. 2023-24. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to P & L account for the year ended 31.03.2023, submitted that the assessee had shown other income of Rs.22,24,62,543/- which includes forfeited loans by the assessee and this was offered to tax as the assessee has shown profit before tax of Rs.14.39 lacs which figure matches with profit as per P & L account shown by the assessee in its computation filed for the A.Y. 2023- 24. A copy of the computation filed for the A.Y.2023-24 is placed on record. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, thus, submitted that since the assessee had already forfeited these loans and offered to tax in the A.Y.2023-24, taxing the same amounts during the A.Y.2020-21 amounts to double taxation. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of

CIT Vs. Excel Industries (358 ITR 295) submits that since the assessee had already offered the forfeited loans as income of the assessee for the A.Y. 2023-24 the revenue is not deprived of tax as the rate of tax remained same in both the assessment years and is revenue neutral. Therefore, the addition made by the AO for the assessment year under consideration becomes entirely academic. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that as a matter of fact there was a loss during the A.Y.2020-21 due to which the assessee had filed NIL return and during the assessment year 2023-24 there was taxable income which shown that the Assessee paid the taxes on that amounts during the Assessment Year 2023-24. 6. On the other hand the Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 7. Heard rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below and the materials placed before us. On perusal of the computation of income furnished by the assessee before us for the A.Y. 2023-24 and the statement of profit and loss account for the year dated 31.03.2023, it is observed that the assessee had shown other income of Rs.2224.63 lacs and arrived at the profit before tax of Rs.1439.49 lacs which figure was reflected as income in the computation of income filed by the assessee for the A.Y. 2023-24.

8.

The assessee also furnished breakup of other income as on 31.03.2023 and 31.03.2022 as reflected in the P & L account as under :-

9.

The assessee also further submitted the break up for forfeited income which is as under :-

10.

As is evident from the above the assessee has reflected the forfeited loans as part of other income in its P & L Page | 4

account for the year ended 31.03.2023, therefore, since the assessee had already forfeited these loans and offered to tax during the assessment year 2023-24 the addition made during the assessment year i.e. 2020-2021 that i.e. year of obtaining loans would result in double taxation. 11. In the circumstances we are inclined to delete the addition made for the A.Y. 2020-21 and accordingly we direct the AO to delete the addition made u/s.68 of the Act in respect of loan creditors namely Bhavishya Invest Serve Pvt. Ltd. and Nandini Tradex Private Limited. Ground Nos.5 and 6 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed. 12. Coming to ground Nos. 1 to 4 which are legal grounds raised by the assessee, in view of the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel that assessee would like to pursue only grounds on merits, the legal grounds raised in ground Nos. 1 to 4 are dismissed as not pressed. 14. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is paratly allowed as indicated above. Order pronounced in the open court on 15.05.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [AMITABH SHUKLA] [C.N. PRASAD] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 15.05.2026

NEHA , Sr.P.S.* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →