URVIL AKSHAYA JANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(2), MUMBAI

आदेश / O R D E R

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 8654 8738 8527 8899 9049 & 9144/Mum/2025 A.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Urvil Akshaya Jani PER BENCH :-

The above captioned appeals preferred by the assessee pertain to the orders passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 144 while ITA No.9144/Mum/2025 passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] as passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income- tax, Appeal, CIT(A) 48, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] for the Assessment Years (A.Ys) 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018- 19 & 2020-21. Since the issues involved are common, the facts being identical, barring figurative variations and also that these appeals were heard together, they are being taken up for adjudication vide this composite order for the sake of brevity. We take up appeal for the AY 2014-15 first as the „Lead case‟. 2. The grounds of the appeals are as under:- ITA No. 8654/MUM/2025(AY 2014-15) 1. The CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 39,83,39,000/- under section 69 of the Act. 2. The CIT (A) erred in confirming the protective addition of Rs. 186,74,91,742/- in the hands of the Appellant. 3. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the Best Judgment assessment framed u/s 153A r.w.s. 144 by the Ld. A.O. vide order dated 30.09.2021 without appreciating that the Appellant had not been provided sufficient opportunity for submitting the relevant details before the AO/ the CIT (A). 4. The CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the Appellant could not avail sufficient opportunity of being heard due to circumstances beyond his

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 8654 8738 8527 8899 9049 & 9144/Mum/2025 A.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Urvil Akshaya Jani control, and hence, one more opportunity of being heard be granted to the Appellant. 5. The CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the addition made by the AO resulted in double addition/double taxation and hence the same are bad in law. 3. Facts of the case are that in this case, search and seizure operation was conducted by GST Department in October 2018 at the premises of the One World Group of which the assessee is one of the directors. Later, search and seizure operation was conducted by the Income Tax Department as well on 06.11.2019.Action u/s 153A of the Act was undertaken. However, on account of non compliance by the assessee, the assessment order was framed u/s 144 of the Act making various additions in respect of business receipts, Unexplained investments u/s 69 of the Act as also Protective addition was made. 4. The assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A) contesting the additions made. However, it is noticed that the ld.CIT(A) dismissed all the grounds on the observations that the AO resorted to ex parte assessment as the assessee neither filed the return in response to notice u/s 153A of the Act nor made any compliance before him. The assessee did not cooperate during assessment proceedings either. Therefore, the assessee failed to discharge the onus in the matter. 5. When the case was called out for hearing by the Bench, it was neither represented by the assessee nor anyone on his behalf. No

P a g e | 4 ITA No. 8654 8738 8527 8899 9049 & 9144/Mum/2025 A.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Urvil Akshaya Jani adjournment petition was also filed seeking any adjournment. The order sheet also reveals that the case went unattended on several occasions. We find that the assessee has merely filed a statement of facts contesting the assessment and the appellate order which are not accompanied by any cogent evidence. In view of such facts, it is evident that the assessee is habitually non-compliant. In such a situation, the appeal cannot be kept pending at the whims and fancies of the assessee and it can very well be inferred that he has nothing to defend in the matter. Accordingly, we deem it fit to uphold the orders of the lower authorities, thus dismissing the grounds of appeal. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 7. ITA No. 8738/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No. 8527/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17) ITA No. 8899/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18) ITA No. 9049/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19) ITA No. 9144/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2020-21)

P a g e | 5 ITA No. 8654 8738 8527 8899 9049 & 9144/Mum/2025 A.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Urvil Akshaya Jani Order pronounced in the open court on 20.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/-

(CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (PRABHASH SHANKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Place: म ुंबई/Mumbai दिन ुंक /Date 20.08.2026 Lubhna Shaikh / Steno

आदेश की प्रतितलतप अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविवनवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अतधकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.