Balkar Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
68 Can’t Be Sustained by Ignoring Filed Evidence: Daughter’s Loan Needs Proper Examination – ITAT Delhi Orders Fresh Look
Assessee, proprietor of M/s Baba Hanuman Mineral, challenged addition of ₹1.12 crore u/s 68 in respect of unsecured loan received from his daughter, Divyangana Singh. AO treated the loan as unexplained for alleged failure to prove identity, creditworthiness & genuineness. NFAC partly sustained the addition, recording that no evidence was furnished—despite Assessee’s claim to the contrary.
ITAT Delhi found merit in Assessee’s grievance. Tribunal noted that Assessee had placed on record multiple documentary evidences, including loan account of the daughter in Assessee’s books, lender’s ITR reflecting the loan, bank statements of Assessee, and cheque-wise details evidencing banking transactions—all uploaded on the portal. Recording that NFAC’s observations were contrary to the material available on record, ITAT held that the issue requires proper verification of evidence, which was not undertaken.
With Revenue not opposing remand, Tribunal set aside the impugned finding and restored the matter to AO to examine all evidences and decide afresh in accordance with law after granting adequate opportunity to Assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
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.
