DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRLCE -3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. KAMLASHRI DEVELOPER, MUMBAI

Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, these appeals were clubbed together and heard together. Accordingly, a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. First, we shall take up ITA No. 1743/Mum/2026. The Revenue has raised the following grounds:

All the grounds raised by the Revenue are interrelated and interconnected and relates to challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the additions made by the AO on account of disallowance of interest expenditure on bogus/unverified loans. Therefore, we have decided to adjudicate these grounds through the present consolidated order.

We have heard the counsels for both parties, perused the material placed on record, the judgments cited before us, and the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities. From the records, we noticed that the issue in question is fully covered by a series of decisions of the coordinate bench of the ITAT, most recently the decision in the case of Kamla Landmarc Enterprises in ITA Nos. 3198 and 3199/Mum/2026 dated 22.05.2026.

We also notice that, in the present case, the learned CIT(A), after considering the submissions advanced and taking note of the earlier orders passed by the coordinate bench of the ITAT in ITA Nos. 1365 to 1369/Mum/2019 dated 24.03.2022, had held that once the additions made under Section 68 of the Act in respect of the principal loans had already been deleted by the Tribunal, the corresponding disallowance of interest thereon in the subsequent years could not be sustained.

The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the AO had proceeded entirely on the premise that the loans themselves were non-genuine accommodation entries, whereas such issue had already stood conclusively adjudicated in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal.

Even otherwise, no new facts, circumstances, or documents have been placed on record by the Ld. DR to controvert or rebut the lawful findings so recorded by the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we see no reason to interfere with or deviate from the findings so recorded by the Ld. CIT(A). Hence, we dismiss the grounds raised by the Revenue and uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A).

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.

Since the issues involved in these appeals are identical to those in ITA No. 1743/Mum/2026, the findings and decisions rendered in the above paragraphs shall apply mutatis mutandis to these appeals as well.