Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee did not initially file her return of income. A notice under Section 148 was issued due to a high-value transaction. Subsequently, the assessee filed a return and the AO made an addition of Rs. 8,70,000/-, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal held that loans from close relatives (sister-in-law and sons) with sufficient income/land should not be doubted. The Tribunal also found no such credit entry for the addition of Rs. 2,20,000/-. Thus, the addition of Rs. 8,70,000/- was deleted.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of Rs. 8,70,000/- on account of alleged unexplained credit entries, including loans from relatives, is justified.
Sections Cited
148, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 07.01.2025 passed for assessment year 2013-14.
The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal which are argumentative and descriptive in nature. In brief, the A.Y.2013-14 2 grievance is that ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in making an addition of Rs.8,70,000/- to the total income of the assessee.
3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee originally did not file her return of income. A notice u/s 148 was issued on the ground that a high value transaction of Rs.54,89,424/- was noticed in her HDFC Bank. In response to that, assessee has filed her return of income declaring an income of Rs.9,78,950/-. The AO, thereafter, noticed various credit entries and made an addition of Rs.8,70,000/-. This addition has been confirmed by the ld. First Appellate Authority.
4. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. A perusal of the record would reveal that assessee has taken a loan of Rs.4 lacs from his sister-in-law (Bhabhi) Smt. Suman Gehlot. Smt. Suman Gehlot has filed a return of income declaring total income at Rs.6,10,161/-. She has sufficient balance. To our mind, a loan from a close relative should have not been doubted by the AO in this manner and ld. CIT (Appeals) ought to have not confirmed the addition. Similarly, assessee has taken a sum of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.40,000/- from her two sons, Arun Dalal A.Y.2013-14 3 and Ajay Chaudhry. Both of them are having sufficient agriculture land i.e. 10 acre and 16 acre which could easily generate income for giving a loan to their mother.
4.1 The next item added by the AO is of Rs.2,20,000/-. According to the assessee, there is no such credit entry in the account and AO has made unnecessary addition. We have perused the bank statement and we do not find any such credit entry. Thus, we fail to understand how AO has made the addition.
On an overall, appreciation of facts and the material placed before us, we are of the view that there is no unexplained credit in the hands of the assessee for which an addition of Rs.8,70,000/- could be made. Accordingly, we allow the appeal of the assessee and delete the addition of Rs.8,70,000/- made to the total income of the assessee.
In the result, appeal is allowed.
Order pronounced on 10.09.2025.