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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4342/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 December 2025AY 2017-20183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the AO, directing him to examine the evidences furnished by the assessee regarding the unsecured loan and decide the issue afresh after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee received an unsecured loan of Rs. 1,12,00,000/- from his daughter. The CIT(A)/NFAC partly sustained the disallowance under Section 68 for want of veracity regarding the genuineness, identity, and creditworthiness of the loan creditor.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC correctly sustained the disallowance under Section 68 without considering the documentary evidences furnished by the assessee regarding the genuineness, identity, and creditworthiness of the unsecured loan creditor.

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, ‘A’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

Hearing: 24.09.2025Pronounced: 12.12.2025

ORDER

PER C.N. PRASAD, JM,

1.

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.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →