Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's assessment was reopened, and the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 10 lakhs under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, treating an unsecured loan from M/s Alton Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. as unexplained cash credit. The CIT(A) subsequently deleted this addition, finding the loan transaction genuine and the details explained.
Held
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, observing that the assessee had explained the details of the unsecured loan and its repayment, which were transacted through banking channels. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s reasoned decision to delete the addition.
Key Issues
Whether the addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credit related to an unsecured loan was correctly deleted by the CIT(A), considering the genuineness and repayment through banking channels.
Sections Cited
Section 68, Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Ms. Suchitra Kamble
आदेश/ORDER This is an appeal filed against the order dated 25-08- 2025 passed by ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Noida for assessment year 2012-13.
The grounds of appeal are as under:- “(a) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on account of unexplained cash credit, without properly appreciating the facts brought on record by the Assessing Officer. (b) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in accepting the genuineness of the loan transaction merely on the basis that the amount was received and repaid through banking channels, without verifying the source of funds and creditworthiness of the lender, M/s Alton Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
1. 1. 1. 1. (c) The appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend all or any the ground before the final hearing of the appeal.”
3. The assessee is an individual and filed return of income for assessment year 2012-13 on 29-09-2012 declaring total income at Rs. 22,26,830/-. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act thereby issuing notice u/s. 148 on 29-03-2019. Based on the information from DDIT Investment, the assessee filed return of income in response to the notice u/s. 148 on 20-08-2019. The statutory notices were issued during the re-assessment proceedings and the same was replied by the assessee. The assessee also submitted various documents in respect of land transaction i.e. confirmation of loan bank statement of the assessee as well as bank statement of the lender. The Assessing Officer passed assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act vide order dated 10-12-2019 thereby making addition of Rs. 10 lakhs as unsecured loan treating as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act.
Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee
The ld. D.R. submitted that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition as the assessee has not explained the cash credit and has not brought anything related to the amount received and repaid through banking channels.
The ld. A.R. relied upon the order of the CIT(A) and submitted all the relevant documents were filed before the CIT(A). The ld. A.R. also submitted that the present appeal is low tax appeal.
Heard both the parties and perused all the material 7. available on record. It is pertinent to note that this is a search ITO vs. Mohanbhai Laljibhai Rami, A.Y. 2012-13 matter related to the unsecured loan from M/s. Alton Infra Pvt. Ltd., therefore does not come under the circular of low tax effect but comes under the exceptions prescribed in the said circular. Beside this, on merit, the assessee has explained the details related to the unsecured loan and in fact has given the details related to the repayment of the said loan and after taking cognizance of the same, the CIT(A) has passed reasoned order thereby deleting the addition. There is no need to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A).
In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.