BALKAR SINGH,GURGOAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (ITO) 1(3) GURGAON, GURGOAN

PER C.N. PRASAD, JM,

This appeal filed by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC,
Delhi [herein after referred as “CIT(A)”] dated 29.07.2024 for the A.Y. 2017-18 in partly sustaining disallowance u/s.68 of the Act.
2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that this appeal is preferred by the assessee
Sh. Balkar Singh Properitor of M/s. Baba Hanuman Mineral for the A.Y.
2017-18
in upholding the addition of Rs.1,12,00,000/- on account of unsecured loan received by the assessee from his daughter (Divyangana Singh) u/s.68 for want of veracity as to genuineness, identity and creditworthiness of the loan creditor.
3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC the assessee has furnished documentary evidences and explanations with respect to unsecured loan transaction from his daughter and proved the genuineness, creditworthiness and identity. Despite the assessee filing various evidences, the NFAC ignoring those evidences sustained the disallowance.
4. The Ld. Counsel further inviting our attention to the submissions made in the paper book stated that in para-5.2.7
and 5.2.9, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC stated that no evidences were furnished by the assessee the genuineness of the transaction is not proved which is contrary to the evidences and submission made by the assessee on 12.07.2024 in the income tax portal. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has furnished statement of loan account of Divyangana Singh in the books of account of the assessee, ITR of Divyangana Singh showing loan entries, bank statement of M/s. Baba Hanuman Minerals and also the account wise details of cheques issued by the lender. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that all these evidences were furnished by the assessee before the CIT(A)/NFAC which he failed to consider. Therefore, he submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of AO for consideration of all these documents.
5. The DR has no serious objection in restoring the matter for examination of these documents.
6. Considering the rival submission and perusing the orders of the authorities below and the evidences placed before us, we deem it appropriate to restore the appeal to the file of the AO for examining the evidences furnished by the assessee and the contentions thereon and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12.12.2025. /- [M. BALAGANESH] [C.N. PRASAD]
ACCOUTNANT MEMBER
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: .12.2025
NEHA , Sr.P.S.*