ROHIT AGGARWAL,AMBALA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal deleted the additions for unexplained investment and expenditure, ruling that uncorroborated loose sheets and retracted statements could not be the sole basis for such additions. For AY 2016-17, the disallowance of interest expenditure was deleted as the assessee had sufficient owned funds to make interest-free advances, implying borrowed funds were not diverted for this purpose.
What were the facts?
The assessee faced additions for unexplained investment (AY 2013-14) and unexplained expenditure (AY 2015-16) based on loose sheets found during a search. For AY 2016-17, the Ld. AO disallowed bank interest expenditure claimed under section 57(iii) on the grounds that the assessee had advanced interest-free loans while paying interest on borrowed funds.
What were the issues?
1. Whether additions based on uncorroborated loose sheets and retracted statements are valid. 2. Whether interest expenditure claimed under section 57(iii) can be disallowed when the assessee possesses sufficient own funds to make interest-free advances.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 153A(1)(b),Section 143(3),Section 131,Section 132(4),Section 139(1),Section 153A,Section 57(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(5)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala666 citing91 ITR 18 · 1973 · SC
- CBI v. V.C. Shukla442 citing3 AIR 410 · 1998
- Common Cause v. Union of India267 citing77 Taxmann.com 245 · 2017 · SC
- CIT v. Sunil Agarwal (254 citing379 ITR 367 · 2014 · HC
- Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303 (Del) Satinder Kumar (HUF) V. CIT: 106 ITR 64 (HP) DCIT v. Sreeni Printers60 citing88 ITR 293 · 1973 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Per Bench
Aforesaid appeals by assessee for captioned Assessment Years arises out of separate orders of learned first appellate authority. First, we take up appeal for Assessment Year (AY) 2013- 14 wherein the sole grievance of the assessee is addition of unexplain
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 153A(1)(b)
- Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs DCIT Central Circle 2 Aurangabad, AurangabadITSSA 37/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2015-16
- Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs DCIT Central Circle 2 Aurangabad, AurangabadITSSA 36/PUN/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2014-15
- Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs DCIT Central Circle 2 Aurangabad, AurangabadITSSA 35/PUN/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
- Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs DCIT Central Circle 2 Aurangabad, AurangabadITSSA 34/PUN/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- Rohit Aggarwal, Ambala vs DCIT, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh, Central…ITA 427/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed9 Mar 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026