MANJUDEVI SURESH PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI , MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (JUDICIAL MEMBER)

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21

Manjudevi Suresh Purohit, DCIT, Central Circle 4(2), 315, Jolly Bhawan No. 1, 10 New Kautilya Bhawan, C 41-43, Vs. Marine Lines, Churchgate, Avenue 3, Near Videsh Mumbai-400020. Bhavan, G Block BKC, Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. PAN NO. CQEPP 1949 P Appellant Respondent

: Mr. Bharat Kumar Assessee by : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR Revenue by

: 20/04/2026 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 28/04/2026

ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

The captioned appeal is preferred by the assessee challenging the order dated 06.10.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – 52, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] passed order u/s

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 2 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) pertaining to tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) pertaining to tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) pertaining to assessment year 20202 20202-21, raising following grounds: grounds:

“1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["CIT(A)"] 1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["CIT(A)"] 1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["CIT(A)"] has grossly erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer has grossly erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer has grossly erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in making an addition of Rs. 15,21,100/ in making an addition of Rs. 15,21,100/- as unexplained as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income investment under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year, without proper appreciation of facts and law. Assessment Year, without proper appreciation of facts and law. Assessment Year, without proper appreciation of facts and law. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition without providing the appellant an effective the addition without providing the appellant an effective the addition without providing the appellant an effective opportunity of cross opportunity of cross-examination of the persons whose statements examination of the persons whose statements have been relied upon, thereby violating the principles of natural have been relied upon, thereby violating the principles of natural have been relied upon, thereby violating the principles of natural justice." 3. The lower authorities erred in placing reliance on mere 3. The lower authorities erred in placing reliance on mere 3. The lower authorities erred in placing reliance on mere allegations regarding a supposed payment to M/s. Rubberwala allegations regarding a supposed payment to M/s. Rubberwala allegations regarding a supposed payment to M/s. Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Limited, in the absence of any Housing and Infrastructure Limited, in the absence of any Housing and Infrastructure Limited, in the absence of any corroborative trail or independent verification to substantiate such corroborative trail or independent verification to substantiate such corroborative trail or independent verification to substantiate such a claim. 4. The appellate order suffers from non 4. The appellate order suffers from non-application of mind application of mind inasmuch as it disregarded the evidence furnished by the inasmuch as it disregarded the evidence furnished by the inasmuch as it disregarded the evidence furnished by the appellant and proceeded to confirm the addition in a mechani appellant and proceeded to confirm the addition in a mechani appellant and proceeded to confirm the addition in a mechanical manner, solely based on conjectures. manner, solely based on conjectures. 5. The A.O. did not share any incrementing materials which used 5. The A.O. did not share any incrementing materials which used 5. The A.O. did not share any incrementing materials which used against the assessee which is valuation of principle of natural against the assessee which is valuation of principle of natural against the assessee which is valuation of principle of natural justice.” 2. The genesis of the present appeal e genesis of the present appeal lies in a search and seizure lies in a search and seizure operation conducted under Section 132 of the Income conducted under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, conducted under Section 132 of the Income 1961, at the premises of the 'Rubberwala Group' (M/s Rubberwala 1961, at the premises of the 'Rubberwala Group' (M/s Rubberwala 1961, at the premises of the 'Rubberwala Group' (M/s Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Ltd., hereinafter 'RHIL'). During the Housing and Infrastructure Ltd., hereinafter 'RHIL'). During the Housing and Infrastructure Ltd., hereinafter 'RHIL'). During the course of said search proceedings, R se of said search proceedings, Revenue authorities recorded evenue authorities recorded statements of the promoter, Shri Tabresh Shaikh, and a key of the promoter, Shri Tabresh Shaikh, and a key of the promoter, Shri Tabresh Shaikh, and a key employee, Shri Imran Ansari. employee, Shri Imran Ansari. The search team also found a The search team also found a ‘pendrive’ from sh Imran Ansari, on which data of sale of shops was Imran Ansari, on which data of sale of shops was Imran Ansari, on which data of sale of shops was

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 3 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

maintained in excel sheet. maintained in excel sheet. The essence of their depositions The essence of their depositions suggested that for the "Platinum Mall" project of RHIL, various suggested that for the "Platinum Mall" project of RHIL, various suggested that for the "Platinum Mall" project of RHIL, various purchasers, including the present assessee, had paid "on-money" in purchasers, including the present assessee, had paid "on purchasers, including the present assessee, had paid "on cash, over and above the registered consideration. The aggregate cash, over and above the registered consideration. The aggregate cash, over and above the registered consideration. The aggregate amount of such alleged cash amount of such alleged cash receipts from various purchasers receipts from various purchasers amounted to ₹151,39,11,206/ 151,39,11,206/-, was treated by the builder group as , was treated by the builder group as unaccounted receipts and subsequently offered to tax by applying a unaccounted receipts and subsequently offered to tax by applying a unaccounted receipts and subsequently offered to tax by applying a profit rate of 8%.

2.1 Relying upon these third Relying upon these third-party statements and excel sheet party statements and excel sheet maintained on pendrive seized fro ed on pendrive seized from residence of sh Imran Ansari, m residence of sh Imran Ansari, the Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under Section the Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under Section the Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under Section 153C. During assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act, the 153C. During assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act, 153C. During assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act, Assessing Officer presumed that the purchasers of shops in the said Assessing Officer presumed that the purchasers of shops in the said Assessing Officer presumed that the purchasers of shops in the said project had made corresponding cash payments. Accordingly, the had made corresponding cash payments. Accordingly, the had made corresponding cash payments. Accordingly, the alleged cash component alleged cash component aggregating to Rs.18,71,100 18,71,100/- attributable to the assessee was treated as unexplained investment/expenditure to the assessee was treated as unexplained investment/expenditure to the assessee was treated as unexplained investment/expenditure in the hands of the assessee in the hands of the assessee in two assessment years i.e. assessment years i.e. Rs.3,50,000/- in assessment year in assessment year 2019-2020 ; and and Rs.15,21,100/- in assessment year 2020 2020-21.

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 4 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

towards alleged on-money payment to RHIL. The additi money payment to RHIL. The additi money payment to RHIL. The addition so made by the Assessing Officer by the Assessing Officer has been confirmed by the learned confirmed by the learned Commissioner of Income Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).

4.1 Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on abovementioned grounds. challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on abovementioned grounds. challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on abovementioned grounds.

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 5 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 6 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

corroborative evidence, such as independent diaries or cash trails. corroborative evidence, such as independent diaries or cash trails. corroborative evidence, such as independent diaries or cash trails. Under Section 69, the burden lies on the Revenue to first prove that Under Section 69, the burden lies on the Revenue to first Under Section 69, the burden lies on the Revenue to first an investment was made before asking the assessee to explain its an investment was made before asking the assessee to explain its an investment was made before asking the assessee to explain its source.

7.1 We find that the issue involved in the present case is squarely We find that the issue involved in the present case is squarely We find that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Pravin Pravin Pravin Khetaram Khetaram Khetaram Purohit Purohit Purohit v. v. v. DCIT DCIT DCIT & & & Ors. Ors Ors (ITA No. 4742/Mum/2025 dated 15.10.2025) 4742/Mum/2025 dated 15.10.2025) relating to the same group relating to the same group and identical facts. The Coordinate Bench, after an elaborate and identical facts. The Coordinate Bench, after an elaborate and identical facts. The Coordinate Bench, after an elaborate consideration of the very same search material, statements and consideration of the very same search material, statements and consideration of the very same search material, statements and legal position, held that no addition can be sustained merely on the legal position, held that no addition can be sustained merely legal position, held that no addition can be sustained merely basis of third-party statements or electronic data recovered from the party statements or electronic data recovered from the party statements or electronic data recovered from the premises of the builder group, in the absence of any corroborative premises of the builder group, in the absence of any corroborative premises of the builder group, in the absence of any corroborative evidence establishing payment of on evidence establishing payment of on-money by the purchaser. money by the purchaser.

7.2 The Coordinate Bench further observed that wher The Coordinate Bench further observed that wher The Coordinate Bench further observed that where the assessee has denied having made any such payment and the assessee has denied having made any such payment and the assessee has denied having made any such payment and the Revenue fails to bring any independent material on record, the Revenue fails to bring any independent material on record, the Revenue fails to bring any independent material on record, the addition cannot be sustained. The Bench also emphasized that addition cannot be sustained. The Bench also emphasized that addition cannot be sustained. The Bench also emphasized that failure to provide the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine the failure to provide the assessee an opportunity to cross failure to provide the assessee an opportunity to cross persons whose statements are relied upon amounts to a serious ersons whose statements are relied upon amounts to a serious ersons whose statements are relied upon amounts to a serious violation of the principles of natural justice, rendering the addition violation of the principles of natural justice, rendering the addition violation of the principles of natural justice, rendering the addition unsustainable in law. unsustainable in law. The relevant extract of the decision of the Co The relevant extract of the decision of the Co- ordinate Bench in the case of Pravin Khetaram Purohit v Pravin Khetaram Purohit v. DCIT & ordinate Bench in the case of

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 7 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

ors. in ITA No. 4742/Mum/2025 dated 15.10.2025 relied upon ors. in ITA No. 4742/Mum/2025 dated 15.10.2025 ors. in ITA No. 4742/Mum/2025 dated 15.10.2025 by the Ld. counsel is reproduced herein under by the Ld. counsel is reproduced herein under for ready for ready reference:

“8. We have heard the arguments for both the parties and have also perused the “8. We have heard the arguments for both the parties and have also perused the “8. We have heard the arguments for both the parties and have also perused the material placed on record, judgements cite material placed on record, judgements cited before me and the orders passed by d before me and the orders passed by the revenue authorities. From the records, we noticed that the assessment was the revenue authorities. From the records, we noticed that the assessment was the revenue authorities. From the records, we noticed that the assessment was completed u/s 153C on account of the fact that a search and seizure action was completed u/s 153C on account of the fact that a search and seizure action was completed u/s 153C on account of the fact that a search and seizure action was conducted on 17.03.2021 on Rubberwala group. In search action, premises of conducted on 17.03.2021 on Rubberwala group. In search action, conducted on 17.03.2021 on Rubberwala group. In search action, M/s. Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd (RHIL), its promoter and director- M/s. Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd (RHIL), its promoter and director M/s. Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd (RHIL), its promoter and director Shri Tabrez Shaikh, and a key employee of Rubberwala group Shri Imran Ansari, Shri Tabrez Shaikh, and a key employee of Rubberwala group Shri Imran Ansari, Shri Tabrez Shaikh, and a key employee of Rubberwala group Shri Imran Ansari, who was handling sale & registration of shops in “Platinum Mall” project of RHIL who was handling sale & registration of shops in “Platinum Mall” project of RHIL who was handling sale & registration of shops in “Platinum Mall” project of RHIL were covered. Among others, statement of these persons were recorded on oath covered. Among others, statement of these persons were recorded on oath covered. Among others, statement of these persons were recorded on oath on various dates during the course of search as well as post search proceedings. on various dates during the course of search as well as post search proceedings. on various dates during the course of search as well as post search proceedings. The employee of Rubberwala group confirmed that the cash has been collected The employee of Rubberwala group confirmed that the cash has been collected The employee of Rubberwala group confirmed that the cash has been collected from the respective buyers from the respective buyers of the shops. However, on the other hand, the of the shops. However, on the other hand, the assessee denied payment of cash. We noticed that during the search a pendrive assessee denied payment of cash. We noticed that during the search a pendrive assessee denied payment of cash. We noticed that during the search a pendrive with the details of cash transactions with respect to Rubberwala group was with the details of cash transactions with respect to Rubberwala group was with the details of cash transactions with respect to Rubberwala group was found, which was confirmed through statement of Shri Imran Ansari recorded found, which was confirmed through statement of Shri Imra found, which was confirmed through statement of Shri Imra U/s 132(4) of the Act and on this basis, 153C order was framed and the same U/s 132(4) of the Act and on this basis, 153C order was framed and the same U/s 132(4) of the Act and on this basis, 153C order was framed and the same was upheld by the Ld.CIT(A). was upheld by the Ld.CIT(A). 9. We noticed that Ld. CIT(A) although referred the decision of the coordinate 9. We noticed that Ld. CIT(A) although referred the decision of the coordinate 9. We noticed that Ld. CIT(A) although referred the decision of the coordinate bench in case of Rajesh Jain on identical issue but bench in case of Rajesh Jain on identical issue but misplace its reliance. After misplace its reliance. After having gone through the basic facts of Rajesh Jain case which is mentioned by having gone through the basic facts of Rajesh Jain case which is mentioned by having gone through the basic facts of Rajesh Jain case which is mentioned by Ld. CIT(A) in its order and the same is reproduced as under: Ld. CIT(A) in its order and the same is reproduced as under: 5.1. On 17.03.2021, the residential premise of the assessee was also 5.1. On 17.03.2021, the residential premise of the assessee was also 5.1. On 17.03.2021, the residential premise of the assessee was also covered by way of s covered by way of search action u/s 132 of the IT Act, 1961. Search action earch action u/s 132 of the IT Act, 1961. Search action was also initiated on Rubberwala group on 17.03.2021. In such action was also initiated on Rubberwala group on 17.03.2021. In such action was also initiated on Rubberwala group on 17.03.2021. In such action along with premises (offices/sites/others) of Rubberwala group entities, along with premises (offices/sites/others) of Rubberwala group entities, along with premises (offices/sites/others) of Rubberwala group entities, residences of various key persons including its promoter a residences of various key persons including its promoter a residences of various key persons including its promoter and director Shri Tabrez Shaikh, and Shri Imran Ansari Tabrez Shaikh, and Shri Imran Ansari - a key employee of Rubberwala a key employee of Rubberwala group handling sale & registration of shops in “Platinum Mall” project of group handling sale & registration of shops in “Platinum Mall” project of group handling sale & registration of shops in “Platinum Mall” project of RHIL were covered under section 132 of the Act. Among others, statement RHIL were covered under section 132 of the Act. Among others, statement RHIL were covered under section 132 of the Act. Among others, statement of these persons were rec of these persons were recorded on oath on various dates during search as orded on oath on various dates during search as well as post search proceedings. well as post search proceedings. 5.2. During the action on Rubberwala Group, among other, residence (at 5.2. During the action on Rubberwala Group, among other, residence (at 5.2. During the action on Rubberwala Group, among other, residence (at 109, 2nd Floor, Prabhat Sadan, 109/120 RBC Marg, Agripada, Mumbai 109, 2nd Floor, Prabhat Sadan, 109/120 RBC Marg, Agripada, Mumbai 109, 2nd Floor, Prabhat Sadan, 109/120 RBC Marg, Agripada, Mumbai Central - 400011) of Shri Imran Ashfa 400011) of Shri Imran Ashfaque Ansari was covered under que Ansari was covered under

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 8 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

section 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961. His statement was also recorded on oath section 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961. His statement was also recorded on oath section 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961. His statement was also recorded on oath at his residence. Vide question no. 11 of the said statement dt. at his residence. Vide question no. 11 of the said statement dt. at his residence. Vide question no. 11 of the said statement dt. 17.03.2021, Shri Imran Ansari was questioned about his roles and 17.03.2021, Shri Imran Ansari was questioned about his roles and 17.03.2021, Shri Imran Ansari was questioned about his roles and responsibilities in M/ responsibilities in M/s. Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd (RHIL). s. Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd (RHIL). In response, Shri Imran Ansari stated that he has been working with In response, Shri Imran Ansari stated that he has been working with In response, Shri Imran Ansari stated that he has been working with Rubberwala group of entities since 2010 and inter Rubberwala group of entities since 2010 and inter-alia handling sale and alia handling sale and registration of the shops in “PlatinumMall” Project of M/s. Rubb registration of the shops in “PlatinumMall” Project of M/s. Rubb registration of the shops in “PlatinumMall” Project of M/s. Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd (RHIL). Housing & Infrastructure Ltd (RHIL). 5.3. Shri Imran Ansari in his response to question no. 13 & 14 of the said 5.3. Shri Imran Ansari in his response to question no. 13 & 14 of the said 5.3. Shri Imran Ansari in his response to question no. 13 & 14 of the said statement explained the complete procedure of the of the sale of shops in statement explained the complete procedure of the of the sale of shops in statement explained the complete procedure of the of the sale of shops in the “Platinum Mall” project. While explaining further about the the “Platinum Mall” project. While explaining further about the the “Platinum Mall” project. While explaining further about the price structure of the shops, Shri Imran Ansari in response to Q. no. 15 structure of the shops, Shri Imran Ansari in response to Q. no. 15 structure of the shops, Shri Imran Ansari in response to Q. no. 15 categorically revealed that the total price of the shops contains cash categorically revealed that the total price of the shops contains cash categorically revealed that the total price of the shops contains cash component and banking channel component, and these components are component and banking channel component, and these components are component and banking channel component, and these components are decided by Shri Tabrez Shaikh (Director/CMD o decided by Shri Tabrez Shaikh (Director/CMD of RHIL and Promoter of f RHIL and Promoter of Rubberwala Group). On probing further, Shri Imran Ansari, in response to Rubberwala Group). On probing further, Shri Imran Ansari, in response to Rubberwala Group). On probing further, Shri Imran Ansari, in response to Q. no. 16, stated that these prices, as decided by Shri Tabrez Shaikh, are Q. no. 16, stated that these prices, as decided by Shri Tabrez Shaikh, are Q. no. 16, stated that these prices, as decided by Shri Tabrez Shaikh, are communicated to him orally. He also revealed in response to Q. no. 17 of communicated to him orally. He also revealed in response to Q. no. 17 of communicated to him orally. He also revealed in response to Q. no. 17 of the said statement that data related to shops is maintained by him in excel tement that data related to shops is maintained by him in excel tement that data related to shops is maintained by him in excel sheets. Corroborating to the fact that data is being maintained by Shri sheets. Corroborating to the fact that data is being maintained by Shri sheets. Corroborating to the fact that data is being maintained by Shri Imran Ansari in excel sheet, during search proceedings at the residence of Imran Ansari in excel sheet, during search proceedings at the residence of Imran Ansari in excel sheet, during search proceedings at the residence of Shri Imran Ansari, a 16GB Pendrive was retrie Shri Imran Ansari, a 16GB Pendrive was retrieved from his possession. ved from his possession. The said pen drive is accepted by Shri Imran Ansari belonging to him and The said pen drive is accepted by Shri Imran Ansari belonging to him and The said pen drive is accepted by Shri Imran Ansari belonging to him and he also accepted that this pen drive is containing data maintained for the he also accepted that this pen drive is containing data maintained for the he also accepted that this pen drive is containing data maintained for the sale of shops in Platinum Mall. Shri Imran Ansari explained that this data sale of shops in Platinum Mall. Shri Imran Ansari explained that this data sale of shops in Platinum Mall. Shri Imran Ansari explained that this data is prepared by him. Shri Imran Ansari’s this acceptance also corroborates red by him. Shri Imran Ansari’s this acceptance also corroborates red by him. Shri Imran Ansari’s this acceptance also corroborates with the fact that the said data was retrieved from the residential with the fact that the said data was retrieved from the residential with the fact that the said data was retrieved from the residential premises of Shri Imran Ansari and not from any office of Rubberwala premises of Shri Imran Ansari and not from any office of Rubberwala premises of Shri Imran Ansari and not from any office of Rubberwala Group. 5.4. It was ascertained that the data is being 5.4. It was ascertained that the data is being maintained by Shri Imran maintained by Shri Imran Ansari in an excel file namely “consolidated 1 2 3 balance”. In the said file Ansari in an excel file namely “consolidated 1 2 3 balance”. In the said file Ansari in an excel file namely “consolidated 1 2 3 balance”. In the said file sheets with different name viz “Master”, “Payment” and “Cheque” etc. are sheets with different name viz “Master”, “Payment” and “Cheque” etc. are sheets with different name viz “Master”, “Payment” and “Cheque” etc. are found to be maintained. It is also found out that in respect of the sale of found to be maintained. It is also found out that in respect of the sale of found to be maintained. It is also found out that in respect of the sale of shops in the said project, comprehensive data is being maintained in these s in the said project, comprehensive data is being maintained in these s in the said project, comprehensive data is being maintained in these excel sheets, and in this regard, it is important to mention that the sheet excel sheets, and in this regard, it is important to mention that the sheet excel sheets, and in this regard, it is important to mention that the sheet “Master” is so elaborate that the data in the said sheet is spread across 98 “Master” is so elaborate that the data in the said sheet is spread across 98 “Master” is so elaborate that the data in the said sheet is spread across 98 columns. Shri Imran Ansari has e columns. Shri Imran Ansari has explained all 98 columns of “Master” sheet xplained all 98 columns of “Master” sheet and such explanation of each and every column by Shri Imran Ansari and such explanation of each and every column by Shri Imran Ansari and such explanation of each and every column by Shri Imran Ansari further support the fact that the he was maintaining the said data and further support the fact that the he was maintaining the said data and further support the fact that the he was maintaining the said data and

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 9 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

therefore could explain all these columns with relevance and purpose. Shri therefore could explain all these columns with relevance and purpose. Shri therefore could explain all these columns with relevance and purpose. Shri Imran Ansari in response to Question no. 22, 23 and 24, has explained in mran Ansari in response to Question no. 22, 23 and 24, has explained in mran Ansari in response to Question no. 22, 23 and 24, has explained in detail the meaning and relevant of each and every column. In column B, detail the meaning and relevant of each and every column. In column B, detail the meaning and relevant of each and every column. In column B, against the name of ‘Raj Bhai Jain’/‘Raj BhaiJain(I.S)’, total 27 shops against the name of ‘Raj Bhai Jain’/‘Raj BhaiJain(I.S)’, total 27 shops against the name of ‘Raj Bhai Jain’/‘Raj BhaiJain(I.S)’, total 27 shops have been entered. Further, these 27 shop have been entered. Further, these 27 shops are stated (by Shri Imran s are stated (by Shri Imran Ansari) to be booked by the assessee only. Also, ShriTabrez Ahmed Ansari) to be booked by the assessee only. Also, ShriTabrez Ahmed Ansari) to be booked by the assessee only. Also, ShriTabrez Ahmed Shaikh, Director and Promoter of the RHIL, while deposing statement Shaikh, Director and Promoter of the RHIL, while deposing statement Shaikh, Director and Promoter of the RHIL, while deposing statement during post search proceedings on 19.08.2021 categorically confirmed the during post search proceedings on 19.08.2021 categorically confirmed the during post search proceedings on 19.08.2021 categorically confirmed the admission made by Shr admission made by Shri Imran Ansari, and has confirmed the data of the i Imran Ansari, and has confirmed the data of the said excel to be true byconfirming facts stated by Shri Imran Ansari in his said excel to be true byconfirming facts stated by Shri Imran Ansari in his said excel to be true byconfirming facts stated by Shri Imran Ansari in his statement. It is also important to note here that the phone number statement. It is also important to note here that the phone number statement. It is also important to note here that the phone number mentioned above i.e., 9892196071 against all 27 shops, is of Sh mentioned above i.e., 9892196071 against all 27 shops, is of Sh mentioned above i.e., 9892196071 against all 27 shops, is of Shri Rajesh Jain. 5.5. Regarding the frequency of updating the said excel file/sheet, Shri 5.5. Regarding the frequency of updating the said excel file/sheet, Shri 5.5. Regarding the frequency of updating the said excel file/sheet, Shri Imran Ansari, in response to Q. no. 25, stated that this sheet is updated on Imran Ansari, in response to Q. no. 25, stated that this sheet is updated on Imran Ansari, in response to Q. no. 25, stated that this sheet is updated on the same day when a payment is received either in cash or cheque (or the same day when a payment is received either in cash or cheque (or the same day when a payment is received either in cash or cheque (or banking channel). The banking channel). The column A to AR of the sheet “Master” are stated to column A to AR of the sheet “Master” are stated to be updated till 16.03.2021 and other sheets of the said excel file are also be updated till 16.03.2021 and other sheets of the said excel file are also be updated till 16.03.2021 and other sheets of the said excel file are also stated to be updated till 16.03.2021. It is revealed in the above response stated to be updated till 16.03.2021. It is revealed in the above response stated to be updated till 16.03.2021. It is revealed in the above response that he takes the parties to ShriAbrar Ahmed (who dur that he takes the parties to ShriAbrar Ahmed (who dur that he takes the parties to ShriAbrar Ahmed (who during the search established to be a person handing cash for the Rubberwala Group). established to be a person handing cash for the Rubberwala Group). established to be a person handing cash for the Rubberwala Group). ShriAbrar Ahmed, after receiving the cash confirms to Shri Imran Ansari ShriAbrar Ahmed, after receiving the cash confirms to Shri Imran Ansari ShriAbrar Ahmed, after receiving the cash confirms to Shri Imran Ansari who update the diariesand the said excel file. Such detailed mechanism in who update the diariesand the said excel file. Such detailed mechanism in who update the diariesand the said excel file. Such detailed mechanism in place further upholds the fa place further upholds the facts stated by Shri Imran Ansari on oath. It is cts stated by Shri Imran Ansari on oath. It is also important to note here that Shri Imran Ansari also used to call and also important to note here that Shri Imran Ansari also used to call and also important to note here that Shri Imran Ansari also used to call and follow up with the buyers on the numbers saved in his data. As follow up with the buyers on the numbers saved in his data. As follow up with the buyers on the numbers saved in his data. As aforementioned, the number, for the shops for which the assessee has aforementioned, the number, for the shops for which the assessee has aforementioned, the number, for the shops for which the assessee has paid the cash component, is mentioned as 9892196071, which is the the cash component, is mentioned as 9892196071, which is the the cash component, is mentioned as 9892196071, which is the assessee’s own number. Thus, it makes clear that for the cash payment assessee’s own number. Thus, it makes clear that for the cash payment assessee’s own number. Thus, it makes clear that for the cash payment part, for all the above mentioned 27 shops, Shri Imran Ansari used to part, for all the above mentioned 27 shops, Shri Imran Ansari used to part, for all the above mentioned 27 shops, Shri Imran Ansari used to follow up with Shri Rajesh Jain/assessee only………………… follow up with Shri Rajesh Jain/assessee only………………… follow up with Shri Rajesh Jain/assessee only………………… 10. We also noticed that the decision of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT in the case 0. We also noticed that the decision of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT in the case 0. We also noticed that the decision of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of Rajesh Jain in ITA No. 3842& 3841 & ITA No. 3954,3952,3951 and of Rajesh Jain in ITA No. 3842& 3841 & ITA No. 3954,3952,3951 and of Rajesh Jain in ITA No. 3842& 3841 & ITA No. 3954,3952,3951 and 3950/Mum/2023 on the identical facts is reproduced herein below: 3950/Mum/2023 on the identical facts is reproduced herein below: 3950/Mum/2023 on the identical facts is reproduced herein below: 12. The appeal filed by the revenue for AY 2 12. The appeal filed by the revenue for AY 2020-21 is with regard to the 21 is with regard to the relief granted by Ld CIT(A) holding that the cash payments relating to the relief granted by Ld CIT(A) holding that the cash payments relating to the relief granted by Ld CIT(A) holding that the cash payments relating to the shops purchased by others cannot be assessed in the hands of the shops purchased by others cannot be assessed in the hands of the shops purchased by others cannot be assessed in the hands of the assessee. The decision rendered by us in AY 2018 assessee. The decision rendered by us in AY 2018-19 and 2019 19 and 2019-20 on an identical issue o identical issue on merits in the earlier paragraphs would apply in this year n merits in the earlier paragraphs would apply in this year

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 10 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

also. Following the same, we affirm the order passed by LdCIT(A) on this also. Following the same, we affirm the order passed by LdCIT(A) on this also. Following the same, we affirm the order passed by LdCIT(A) on this issue. 13. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the addition of alleged cash 13. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the addition of alleged cash 13. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the addition of alleged cash payment of Rs.18,64,200/ payment of Rs.18,64,200/- in respect of purchase of shop confirmed by Ld ase of shop confirmed by Ld CIT(A) is being assailed. CIT(A) is being assailed. 14. We noticed earlier that the assessee had purchased a shop in the 14. We noticed earlier that the assessee had purchased a shop in the 14. We noticed earlier that the assessee had purchased a shop in the commercial premises developed by Rubberwala group. During the course commercial premises developed by Rubberwala group. During the course commercial premises developed by Rubberwala group. During the course of search conducted in their hands, incriminating documents con of search conducted in their hands, incriminating documents con of search conducted in their hands, incriminating documents containing details of cash collected on sale of various shops were found. The details of cash collected on sale of various shops were found. The details of cash collected on sale of various shops were found. The employee of Rubberwala group confirmed that the cash has been collected employee of Rubberwala group confirmed that the cash has been collected employee of Rubberwala group confirmed that the cash has been collected from the buyers of shops. However, the assessee denied payment of cash. from the buyers of shops. However, the assessee denied payment of cash. from the buyers of shops. However, the assessee denied payment of cash. However, the AO relied upon the mater However, the AO relied upon the materials found in the case of ials found in the case of Rubberwala group and accordingly made addition of Rs.18,64,200/ Rubberwala group and accordingly made addition of Rs.18,64,200/ Rubberwala group and accordingly made addition of Rs.18,64,200/- in AY 2020-21. The LdCIT(A) also confirmed the same. 21. The LdCIT(A) also confirmed the same. 15. The ld A.R submitted that the addition was made on the basis of third 15. The ld A.R submitted that the addition was made on the basis of third 15. The ld A.R submitted that the addition was made on the basis of third party statement and documents found f party statement and documents found from the premises of third party. As rom the premises of third party. As per the deposition made by the employee of Rubberwala group, the buyers per the deposition made by the employee of Rubberwala group, the buyers per the deposition made by the employee of Rubberwala group, the buyers were given a diary, in which, the details of cash received were were given a diary, in which, the details of cash received were were given a diary, in which, the details of cash received were acknowledged. The Ld A.R submitted the search officials did not find any acknowledged. The Ld A.R submitted the search officials did not find any acknowledged. The Ld A.R submitted the search officials did not find any such diary with the assessee during the course of search operation with the assessee during the course of search operation with the assessee during the course of search operation conducted in his hands. Hence the statement so given by the employee conducted in his hands. Hence the statement so given by the employee conducted in his hands. Hence the statement so given by the employee stands disproved. He submitted that the AO has simply relied upon third stands disproved. He submitted that the AO has simply relied upon third stands disproved. He submitted that the AO has simply relied upon third party statement without bringing any independent material t party statement without bringing any independent material t party statement without bringing any independent material to support the same. The AO also did not provide the opportunity of cross examination same. The AO also did not provide the opportunity of cross examination same. The AO also did not provide the opportunity of cross examination despite being asked by the assessee. Accordingly, by placing reliance on despite being asked by the assessee. Accordingly, by placing reliance on despite being asked by the assessee. Accordingly, by placing reliance on various case laws, the Ld A.R submitted that this addition should be various case laws, the Ld A.R submitted that this addition should be various case laws, the Ld A.R submitted that this addition should be deleted. 16. We heard Ld D.R 16. We heard Ld D.R and perused the record. We notice that the AO has and perused the record. We notice that the AO has made the addition on the basis of evidence found in the premises of third made the addition on the basis of evidence found in the premises of third made the addition on the basis of evidence found in the premises of third party and also on the basis of deposition made by the employee of the party and also on the basis of deposition made by the employee of the party and also on the basis of deposition made by the employee of the third party. No corroborative material was brought on record third party. No corroborative material was brought on record third party. No corroborative material was brought on record to support the statement so given, which is mandatory when the assessee denies any statement so given, which is mandatory when the assessee denies any statement so given, which is mandatory when the assessee denies any such payment. Further, the AO also did not provide opportunity of cross such payment. Further, the AO also did not provide opportunity of cross such payment. Further, the AO also did not provide opportunity of cross examination to the assessee, even after the said request was made by the examination to the assessee, even after the said request was made by the examination to the assessee, even after the said request was made by the assessee. Under these set of assessee. Under these set of facts, we are of the view that the impugned facts, we are of the view that the impugned addition of Rs.18,64,200/ addition of Rs.18,64,200/- cannot be sustained. In this regard, we may cannot be sustained. In this regard, we may take support from the decision rendered by SMC bench of Mumbai Tribunal take support from the decision rendered by SMC bench of Mumbai Tribunal take support from the decision rendered by SMC bench of Mumbai Tribunal in in in the the the case case case of of of Naren Naren Naren Premchang Premchang Premchang Nagda Nagda Nagda vs. vs. vs. ITO ITO ITO (IT (IT (IT Appeal Appeal Appeal

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 11 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

No.3265/Mum/ No.3265/Mum/2015 dated 08-07-2016), wherein an identical issue was 2016), wherein an identical issue was decided as under: decided as under:- 17. We also notice that the AO did not provide opportunity to cross 17. We also notice that the AO did not provide opportunity to cross 17. We also notice that the AO did not provide opportunity to cross examine the persons from Rubberwala group, on whose statements the AO examine the persons from Rubberwala group, on whose statements the AO examine the persons from Rubberwala group, on whose statements the AO had placed reliance upon. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court has held in the case had placed reliance upon. The Hon e Court has held in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise of Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise of Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2015)(62 taxmann.com 3)(SC) that not providing opportunity to cross (2015)(62 taxmann.com 3)(SC) that not providing opportunity to cross (2015)(62 taxmann.com 3)(SC) that not providing opportunity to cross examine is a serious flaw and it will make the order nullity, as it amounts examine is a serious flaw and it will make the order nullity, as it amounts examine is a serious flaw and it will make the order nullity, as it amounts to violation of pr to violation of principle of natural justice. We are of the view that the above inciple of natural justice. We are of the view that the above said decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court shall apply to the facts of the said decision of Hon ble Supreme Court shall apply to the facts of the present case. 11. From the above we find that the Coordinate bench has consider the same 11. From the above we find that the Coordinate bench has consider the same 11. From the above we find that the Coordinate bench has consider the same facts and rightly decided the issu facts and rightly decided the issue in favour of the assessee and since the facts e in favour of the assessee and since the facts of the present case are also identical with the facts of Rajesh Jain’s (supra) case, of the present case are also identical with the facts of Rajesh Jain’s (supra) case, of the present case are also identical with the facts of Rajesh Jain’s (supra) case, therefore the said decision will be application on the facts of the present case as therefore the said decision will be application on the facts of the present case as therefore the said decision will be application on the facts of the present case as well. Moreover, the assessee categorica well. Moreover, the assessee categorically denied having paid any amount in lly denied having paid any amount in cash over and above the agreement value. The AO has neither confronted cash over and above the agreement value. The AO has neither confronted cash over and above the agreement value. The AO has neither confronted assessee with any of the material found during the search on Rubberwala group assessee with any of the material found during the search on Rubberwala group assessee with any of the material found during the search on Rubberwala group and even no evidence or seized document has been referred to where any name and even no evidence or seized document has been referred to where any and even no evidence or seized document has been referred to where any of the assessee has been explicitly mentioned on account of paying any ‘on- of the assessee has been explicitly mentioned on account of paying any ‘on of the assessee has been explicitly mentioned on account of paying any ‘on money’. 12. Although it has been claimed in the order of assessment that the assessee 12. Although it has been claimed in the order of assessment that the assessee 12. Although it has been claimed in the order of assessment that the assessee had paid on money, but again no such statement has been confronted, neither had paid on money, but again no such statement has been confronted, neither had paid on money, but again no such statement has been confronted, neither the seized material /documents /pendrive was confronted to the assessee nor terial /documents /pendrive was confronted to the assessee nor terial /documents /pendrive was confronted to the assessee nor the copy of statement of Key person was confronted. the copy of statement of Key person was confronted. 13. Therefore, in our view, the information if any found in the pendrive etc., 13. Therefore, in our view, the information if any found in the pendrive etc., 13. Therefore, in our view, the information if any found in the pendrive etc., cannot be considered as ‘credible evidence’, unless they have been corroborated cannot be considered as ‘credible evidence’, unless they have cannot be considered as ‘credible evidence’, unless they have with any other evidence. Since the assessee was not provided with the adverse with any other evidence. Since the assessee was not provided with the adverse with any other evidence. Since the assessee was not provided with the adverse material, if any, based on which notice u/s 153 of the Act, was issued, in our material, if any, based on which notice u/s 153 of the Act, was issued, in our material, if any, based on which notice u/s 153 of the Act, was issued, in our view, it hampers the primary and fundamental requirement of natural justice. view, it hampers the primary and fundamental requirement of natural justice. view, it hampers the primary and fundamental requirement of natural justice. 14. As far as the information claimed in pendrive is concerned, the same was not As far as the information claimed in pendrive is concerned, the same was not As far as the information claimed in pendrive is concerned, the same was not found from the possession of the assessee but was found as per order of found from the possession of the assessee but was found as per order of found from the possession of the assessee but was found as per order of assessment, during the search and seizure conducted in the case of third party assessment, during the search and seizure conducted in the case of third party assessment, during the search and seizure conducted in the case of third party therefore, in the absence o therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to establish that the contents f corroborative evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney’ of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney’ of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney’ in cash, no addition can be made and even otherwise during the entire in cash, no addition can be made and even otherwise during the entire in cash, no addition can be made and even otherwise during the entire reassessment proceedings the veracity and reliabil reassessment proceedings the veracity and reliability of the data recorded in the ity of the data recorded in the

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 12 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

pendrive was not checked or tested. Therefore, in such a scenario no addition is pendrive was not checked or tested. Therefore, in such a scenario no addition is pendrive was not checked or tested. Therefore, in such a scenario no addition is warranted in the case of assessee. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the warranted in the case of assessee. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the warranted in the case of assessee. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the decision in case of Heena Dashrath Jhanglani ITA no.1665/Mum./2018 decision in case of Heena Dashrath Jhanglani ITA no.1665/Mum. decision in case of Heena Dashrath Jhanglani ITA no.1665/Mum. (Assessment Year : 2007 (Assessment Year : 2007–08) wherein the Coordinate Bench of ITAT had decided 08) wherein the Coordinate Bench of ITAT had decided the issue in favour of assessee and the relevant portion is being reproduced the issue in favour of assessee and the relevant portion is being reproduced the issue in favour of assessee and the relevant portion is being reproduced herein below: 10. I have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. 10. I have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. 10. I have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. Undisputedly, the genesis of the addition made of ` 42 lakh on account of ly, the genesis of the addition made of ` 42 lakh on account of ly, the genesis of the addition made of ` 42 lakh on account of alleged payment of on alleged payment of on–money in cash towards purchase of a flat lies in a money in cash towards purchase of a flat lies in a search and seizure operation conducted in case of Hiranandani Group and search and seizure operation conducted in case of Hiranandani Group and search and seizure operation conducted in case of Hiranandani Group and related persons. Though, in the assessment orde related persons. Though, in the assessment order the Assessing Officer r the Assessing Officer has not discussed in detail the nature of incriminating material / evidence has not discussed in detail the nature of incriminating material / evidence has not discussed in detail the nature of incriminating material / evidence available on record to indicate payment of on available on record to indicate payment of on–money in cash by the money in cash by the assessee to M/s. Crescendo Associates, however, from the show cause assessee to M/s. Crescendo Associates, however, from the show cause assessee to M/s. Crescendo Associates, however, from the show cause notice dated 4th Marc notice dated 4th March 2015, which is reproduced by the Assessing h 2015, which is reproduced by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, it appears that the incriminating materials Officer in the assessment order, it appears that the incriminating materials Officer in the assessment order, it appears that the incriminating materials are in the form of pen drive found and seized from the residence of one of are in the form of pen drive found and seized from the residence of one of are in the form of pen drive found and seized from the residence of one of the employees of Hiranandani Group and a statement recorded the employees of Hiranandani Group and a statement recorded the employees of Hiranandani Group and a statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, Director and section 132(4) of the Act from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, Director and section 132(4) of the Act from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, Director and Promoter of the Group, wherein, the details of on Promoter of the Group, wherein, the details of on– money paid by buyers / money paid by buyers / prospective buyers to Hiranandani Group concerns are mentioned and prospective buyers to Hiranandani Group concerns are mentioned and prospective buyers to Hiranandani Group concerns are mentioned and further, in the statement recorded un further, in the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act on 14th der section 132(4) of the Act on 14th March 2014, Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, has admitted receipt of on March 2014, Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, has admitted receipt of on March 2014, Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, has admitted receipt of on–money in cash towards sale of flats / shops. Thus, it is clear that except these in cash towards sale of flats / shops. Thus, it is clear that except these in cash towards sale of flats / shops. Thus, it is clear that except these two pieces of evidences the Assessing Officer had no other evidence on two pieces of evidences the Assessing Officer had no other evidence on two pieces of evidences the Assessing Officer had no other evidence on record which demonstrates that the assessee had paid on record which demonstrates that the assessee had paid on record which demonstrates that the assessee had paid on–money in cash for purchase of the flat. It is further relevant to observe, from the for purchase of the flat. It is further relevant to observe, from the for purchase of the flat. It is further relevant to observe, from the assessment stage itself the assessee has requested the Assessing Officer assessment stage itself the assessee has requested the Assessing Officer assessment stage itself the assessee has requested the Assessing Officer to provide him with all adverse materials a to provide him with all adverse materials and full text of the statement nd full text of the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani. recorded under section 132(4) of the Act from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani. recorded under section 132(4) of the Act from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani. The assessee had also requested the Assessing Officer for allowing her to The assessee had also requested the Assessing Officer for allowing her to The assessee had also requested the Assessing Officer for allowing her to cross–examine Shri Niranjan Hiranandani and other parties whose examine Shri Niranjan Hiranandani and other parties whose examine Shri Niranjan Hiranandani and other parties whose statements were statements were relied upon. Apparently, this request of the assessee was relied upon. Apparently, this request of the assessee was not acceded to by the Assessing Officer. When the assessee took up the not acceded to by the Assessing Officer. When the assessee took up the not acceded to by the Assessing Officer. When the assessee took up the aforesaid issue before the first appellate authority, the learned aforesaid issue before the first appellate authority, the learned aforesaid issue before the first appellate authority, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in letter dated 18th July 2016, had c Commissioner (Appeals) in letter dated 18th July 2016, had c Commissioner (Appeals) in letter dated 18th July 2016, had clearly directed the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee all adverse directed the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee all adverse directed the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee all adverse materials / documentary evidences available with him indicating payment materials / documentary evidences available with him indicating payment materials / documentary evidences available with him indicating payment of on–money. However, on a perusal of the remand report dated 23th June money. However, on a perusal of the remand report dated 23th June money. However, on a perusal of the remand report dated 23th June 2017, a copy of which is at Page 2017, a copy of which is at Page–53 of the paper book, it is very much the paper book, it is very much

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 13 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

clear that the Assessing Officer has completely avoided the issue and clear that the Assessing Officer has completely avoided the issue and clear that the Assessing Officer has completely avoided the issue and there is no mention whether the assessee was provided with all the there is no mention whether the assessee was provided with all the there is no mention whether the assessee was provided with all the adverse material and if, not so, whether he has provided them to the adverse material and if, not so, whether he has provided them to the adverse material and if, not so, whether he has provided them to the assessee as per t assessee as per the directions of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). he directions of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, from the aforesaid facts, it is patent and obvious that the addition of Thus, from the aforesaid facts, it is patent and obvious that the addition of Thus, from the aforesaid facts, it is patent and obvious that the addition of ` 42 lakh made on account of on ` 42 lakh made on account of on–money payment in cash is without money payment in cash is without complying with the primary and fundamental requirement of ru complying with the primary and fundamental requirement of ru complying with the primary and fundamental requirement of rules of natural justice. It is well settled proposition of law that if the Assessing natural justice. It is well settled proposition of law that if the Assessing natural justice. It is well settled proposition of law that if the Assessing Officer intends to utilize any adverse material for deciding an issue Officer intends to utilize any adverse material for deciding an issue Officer intends to utilize any adverse material for deciding an issue against the assessee he is required to not only confront such adverse against the assessee he is required to not only confront such adverse against the assessee he is required to not only confront such adverse materials to the assessee but al materials to the assessee but also offer him a reasonable opportunity to so offer him a reasonable opportunity to rebut / contradict the contents of the adverse material. Further, the rebut / contradict the contents of the adverse material. Further, the rebut / contradict the contents of the adverse material. Further, the assessment order reveals that the Assessing Officer has heavily relied assessment order reveals that the Assessing Officer has heavily relied assessment order reveals that the Assessing Officer has heavily relied upon the statement recorded from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, for making upon the statement recorded from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, for making upon the statement recorded from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, for making the disputed addition. However, it is the allegation of the assessee, which disputed addition. However, it is the allegation of the assessee, which disputed addition. However, it is the allegation of the assessee, which prima–facie appears to be correct, that the Assessing Officer has not facie appears to be correct, that the Assessing Officer has not facie appears to be correct, that the Assessing Officer has not provided the full text of such statement recorded and has also not allowed provided the full text of such statement recorded and has also not allowed provided the full text of such statement recorded and has also not allowed the assessee an opportunity to cross the assessee an opportunity to cross–examine Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, xamine Shri Niranjan Hiranandani, and other persons whose statements were relied upon. This, in my view, is and other persons whose statements were relied upon. This, in my view, is and other persons whose statements were relied upon. This, in my view, is in gross violation of rules of natural justice and against the basic principle in gross violation of rules of natural justice and against the basic principle in gross violation of rules of natural justice and against the basic principle of law. In this context, I may refer to the decision of the Tribunal, of law. In this context, I may refer to the decision of the Tribunal, of law. In this context, I may refer to the decision of the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in Nikhil Vinod Agarwal (supra). Thus, for the aforesaid reason, the Bench, in Nikhil Vinod Agarwal (supra). Thus, for the aforesaid reason, the Bench, in Nikhil Vinod Agarwal (supra). Thus, for the aforesaid reason, the addition made cannot be sustained. addition made cannot be sustained. 11. Even otherwise also, the addition made is unsustainable because of 11. Even otherwise also, the addition made is unsustainable because of 11. Even otherwise also, the addition made is unsustainable because of the following reasons. As discussed earlier in the order, the basi the following reasons. As discussed earlier in the order, the basi the following reasons. As discussed earlier in the order, the basis for addition on account of on addition on account of on–money is the information contained in the pen money is the information contained in the pen drive found during the search and seizure operation and the statement drive found during the search and seizure operation and the statement drive found during the search and seizure operation and the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act. As regards the information recorded under section 132(4) of the Act. As regards the information recorded under section 132(4) of the Act. As regards the information contained in the pen drive, it is the c contained in the pen drive, it is the contention of the assessee that the said ontention of the assessee that the said pen drive was not found from the possession of the assessee but in course pen drive was not found from the possession of the assessee but in course pen drive was not found from the possession of the assessee but in course of search and seizure operation conducted in case of a third party. of search and seizure operation conducted in case of a third party. of search and seizure operation conducted in case of a third party. Therefore, in absence of further corroborative evidence to establish that Therefore, in absence of further corroborative evidence to establish that Therefore, in absence of further corroborative evidence to establish that the contents of the pen drive are correct and authentic to the extent that the contents of the pen drive are correct and authentic to the extent that the contents of the pen drive are correct and authentic to the extent that the assessee paid on assessee paid on–money in cash, no addition can be made under section money in cash, no addition can be made under section 69B of the Act. Further contention of the assessee is that in the statement 69B of the Act. Further contention of the assessee is that in the statement 69B of the Act. Further contention of the assessee is that in the statement recorded under section 132(4) o recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, Shi Niranjan Hirandani has not f the Act, Shi Niranjan Hirandani has not made any reference to the assessee, therefore, in absence of any other made any reference to the assessee, therefore, in absence of any other made any reference to the assessee, therefore, in absence of any other corroborative evidence to establish that assessee has paid on corroborative evidence to establish that assessee has paid on corroborative evidence to establish that assessee has paid on–money in cash, no addition can be made. I find substantial merit in the aforesaid cash, no addition can be made. I find substantial merit in the aforesaid cash, no addition can be made. I find substantial merit in the aforesaid submissions of the assessee. In my view, neither the information contained submissions of the assessee. In my view, neither the information contained submissions of the assessee. In my view, neither the information contained

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 14 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

in the pen drive nor the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act in the pen drive nor the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act in the pen drive nor the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani are enough to conclusively establish the from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani are enough to conclusively establish the from Shri Niranjan Hiranandani are enough to conclusively establish the factum of payment of on factum of payment of on–money by the assessee. At best, they can raise a the assessee. At best, they can raise a doubt or suspicion against the conduct of the assessee triggering further doubt or suspicion against the conduct of the assessee triggering further doubt or suspicion against the conduct of the assessee triggering further enquiry / investigation to find out and bring on record the relevant fact enquiry / investigation to find out and bring on record the relevant fact enquiry / investigation to find out and bring on record the relevant fact and material to conclusively prove the payment of on and material to conclusively prove the payment of on and material to conclusively prove the payment of on–money by the assessee over and above the declared sale consideration. Apparently, the ssessee over and above the declared sale consideration. Apparently, the ssessee over and above the declared sale consideration. Apparently, the Assessing Officer has failed to bring any such evidence / material on Assessing Officer has failed to bring any such evidence / material on Assessing Officer has failed to bring any such evidence / material on record to prove the payment of on record to prove the payment of on–money by the assessee. More so, when money by the assessee. More so, when the assessee from the very beginning has st the assessee from the very beginning has stoutly denied payment of on outly denied payment of on– money in cash. Notably, while dealing with a case involving similar nature money in cash. Notably, while dealing with a case involving similar nature money in cash. Notably, while dealing with a case involving similar nature of dispute concerning similar transaction with another concern of of dispute concerning similar transaction with another concern of of dispute concerning similar transaction with another concern of Hiranandani Group, the Tribunal in case of Shri Anil Jaggi v/s ACIT Hiranandani Group, the Tribunal in case of Shri Anil Jaggi v/s ACIT Hiranandani Group, the Tribunal in case of Shri Anil Jaggi v/s ACIT (supra) has held as (supra) has held as under:– …….. 15. Reliance has also been placed in the case of Monika Anand Gupta I.T.A. No. 15. Reliance has also been placed in the case of Monika Anand Gupta I.T.A. No. 15. Reliance has also been placed in the case of Monika Anand Gupta I.T.A. No. 5561/Mum/2018 (A.Y. 2011 5561/Mum/2018 (A.Y. 2011-12) whereas coordinate bench held as under: 12) whereas coordinate bench held as under: 6. I have heard both the parties and perused the record. I find that the 6. I have heard both the parties and perused the record. I find that the 6. I have heard both the parties and perused the record. I find that the addition for on addition for on-money payment has been done in this case without any payment has been done in this case without any corroborative material found from assessee. The addition is solely based corroborative material found from assessee. The addition is solely based corroborative material found from assessee. The addition is solely based upon some statement of the builder. Such additions are not sustainable on upon some statement of the builder. Such additions are not sustainable on upon some statement of the builder. Such additions are not sustainable on the touchstone of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case o the touchstone of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case o the touchstone of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT vs P.V Kalyana sundasram 164 Taxman 78 (SC). Moreover there is nothing on Kalyana sundasram 164 Taxman 78 (SC). Moreover there is nothing on Kalyana sundasram 164 Taxman 78 (SC). Moreover there is nothing on record to suggest that so called electronic evidence collected by revenue at record to suggest that so called electronic evidence collected by revenue at record to suggest that so called electronic evidence collected by revenue at the builder’s office is compliant with the requirement of section 65B of the builder’s office is compliant with the requirement of section 65B of the builder’s office is compliant with the requirement of section 65B of Evidence Act regarding adm Evidence Act regarding admissibility of electronic evidence. Hence, I set issibility of electronic evidence. Hence, I set aside the orders of the authority below and direct that the addition be aside the orders of the authority below and direct that the addition be aside the orders of the authority below and direct that the addition be deleted. 16. In the case of Mrs. Mamta Sharad Gupta, ITA No.1553/M/2021 Assessment 16. In the case of Mrs. Mamta Sharad Gupta, ITA No.1553/M/2021 Assessment 16. In the case of Mrs. Mamta Sharad Gupta, ITA No.1553/M/2021 Assessment as under: Year: 2011-12, wherein the coordinate bench has held 12, wherein the coordinate bench has held as under: 9. Since the sole issue raised in this appeal is covered by the order (supra) 9. Since the sole issue raised in this appeal is covered by the order (supra) 9. Since the sole issue raised in this appeal is covered by the order (supra) passed by the co passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal addition made in this case ordinate Bench of the Tribunal addition made in this case is not sustainable. Because the addition is made merely on the basis of is not sustainable. Because the addition is made merely on the basis of is not sustainable. Because the addition is made merely on the basis of statement made by one statement made by one Mr. Suraj Parmar, one of the promoters of Cosmos Mr. Suraj Parmar, one of the promoters of Cosmos Group under section 132(4) of the Act without any corroboration. Moreover, Group under section 132(4) of the Act without any corroboration. Moreover, Group under section 132(4) of the Act without any corroboration. Moreover, statement or any material seized during the course of search under section statement or any material seized during the course of search under section statement or any material seized during the course of search under section 132(4) of the Act can only be used against Mr. Suraj Par 132(4) of the Act can only be used against Mr. Suraj Par 132(4) of the Act can only be used against Mr. Suraj Parmar of Cosmos Group and not against the assessee without any corroboration. Excel sheet Group and not against the assessee without any corroboration. Excel sheet Group and not against the assessee without any corroboration. Excel sheet alleged to have been recovered from the office of builders is also not alleged to have been recovered from the office of builders is also not alleged to have been recovered from the office of builders is also not

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 15 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

admissible being not proved under section 65 of the Evidence Act. So in admissible being not proved under section 65 of the Evidence Act. So in admissible being not proved under section 65 of the Evidence Act. So in view of the matter, addit view of the matter, addition made by the AO and sustained by the Ld. ion made by the AO and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence ordered to be deleted. CIT(A) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence ordered to be deleted. CIT(A) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence ordered to be deleted. Consequently, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Consequently, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Consequently, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 17. For the above proposition, we place reliance upon the decision in the case of 17. For the above proposition, we place reliance upon the decision in the case of 17. For the above proposition, we place reliance upon the decision in the case of ITO Vs. Vinod Aggarwal, ITA No. 2573/Mum/2017, ITO Vs. Nikhil Vinod ITO Vs. Vinod Aggarwal, ITA No. 2573/Mum/2017, ITO Vs. Nikhil Vinod ITO Vs. Vinod Aggarwal, ITA No. 2573/Mum/2017, ITO Vs. Nikhil Vinod Aggarwal, ITA No. 2574/Mum/2017 Heena Dashrath Jhanglani Vs. ITO, ITA Aggarwal, ITA No. 2574/Mum/2017 Heena Dashrath Jhanglani Vs. ITO, ITA Aggarwal, ITA No. 2574/Mum/2017 Heena Dashrath Jhanglani Vs. ITO, ITA No.1665/M/2018, Padmashrree Dr. D.Y. Patil University Vs. DCIT, ITA Nos. 3264 No.1665/M/2018, Padmashrree Dr. D.Y. Patil University Vs. DCIT, ITA Nos. 3264 No.1665/M/2018, Padmashrree Dr. D.Y. Patil University Vs. DCIT, ITA Nos. 3264 to 3268/Mum/2022. to 3268/Mum/2022. 18. From the records 18. From the records we also noticed that no statement was provided to the we also noticed that no statement was provided to the assessee, and none of the persons, whose statements were relied upon were assessee, and none of the persons, whose statements were relied upon were assessee, and none of the persons, whose statements were relied upon were produced for cross-examination. Even the extract of the statement mentioned in examination. Even the extract of the statement mentioned in examination. Even the extract of the statement mentioned in the assessment order does not indicate the name o the assessment order does not indicate the name of the assessee. f the assessee. 19. Apart, the AO during the course of assessment also failed to provide the 19. Apart, the AO during the course of assessment also failed to provide the 19. Apart, the AO during the course of assessment also failed to provide the opportunity to cross examine of the witnesses, whose statements were relied opportunity to cross examine of the witnesses, whose statements were relied opportunity to cross examine of the witnesses, whose statements were relied upon by the revenue which resulted in ‘breach of principles of natural justice’. In upon by the revenue which resulted in ‘breach of principles of natural justice’. In upon by the revenue which resulted in ‘breach of principles of natural justice’. In this regard, reliance is being placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court is regard, reliance is being placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court is regard, reliance is being placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE reported in (2015)281 CTR in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE reported in (2015)281 CTR in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE reported in (2015)281 CTR 241 (SC) wherein it has been held that ‘failure to give the assessee the 241 (SC) wherein it has been held that ‘failure to give the assessee the 241 (SC) wherein it has been held that ‘failure to give the assessee the opportunity to cross examine opportunity to cross examine witness, whose statements are relied upon, results witness, whose statements are relied upon, results in breach of principles of Natural Justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the in breach of principles of Natural Justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the in breach of principles of Natural Justice. It is a serious flaw which renders the order a nullity’. 20.In the case of CIT Vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. (418ITR 315), it was held that 20.In the case of CIT Vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. (418ITR 315), it was held that 20.In the case of CIT Vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd. (418ITR 315), it was held that the ‘addition/disallo the ‘addition/disallowance made solely on third party information without wance made solely on third party information without subjecting it to further scrutiny and denying the opportunity of cross examination subjecting it to further scrutiny and denying the opportunity of cross examination subjecting it to further scrutiny and denying the opportunity of cross examination of the third party renders the addition/disallowance bad in law’ of the third party renders the addition/disallowance bad in law’ of the third party renders the addition/disallowance bad in law’ 21. In the case of H.R. Mehta v/s Assistant Commissione 21. In the case of H.R. Mehta v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income r of Income-tax, Mumbai 72 taxmann.com110 (Bombay) wherein it was held as under: 72 taxmann.com110 (Bombay) wherein it was held as under: 72 taxmann.com110 (Bombay) wherein it was held as under: In the light of the fact that the money was advanced apparently by the In the light of the fact that the money was advanced apparently by the In the light of the fact that the money was advanced apparently by the account payee cheque and was repaid vide account payee cheque the account payee cheque and was repaid vide account payee cheque the account payee cheque and was repaid vide account payee cheque the least that the Assessing Officer shoul least that the Assessing Officer should have done was to grant an d have done was to grant an opportunity to the assessee to meet the case against him by providing the opportunity to the assessee to meet the case against him by providing the opportunity to the assessee to meet the case against him by providing the material sought to be used against him in arriving before passing the order material sought to be used against him in arriving before passing the order material sought to be used against him in arriving before passing the order of assessment. This not having been done, the denial of such opportunity of assessment. This not having been done, the denial of such opportunity of assessment. This not having been done, the denial of such opportunity goes to root of the matter and strikes at the very foundation of the to root of the matter and strikes at the very foundation of the to root of the matter and strikes at the very foundation of the assessment assessment assessment and, and, and, therefore, therefore, therefore, renders renders renders the the the orders orders orders passed passed passed by by by the the the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal vulnerable. The assessee was Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal vulnerable. The assessee was Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal vulnerable. The assessee was

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 16 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

bound to be provided with the material used against him apart f bound to be provided with the material used against him apart f bound to be provided with the material used against him apart from being permitting him to cross examine the deponents whose statements were permitting him to cross examine the deponents whose statements were permitting him to cross examine the deponents whose statements were relied upon by him. Despite the request seeking an opportunity to cross relied upon by him. Despite the request seeking an opportunity to cross relied upon by him. Despite the request seeking an opportunity to cross examine the deponents and furnish the assessee with copies of statements examine the deponents and furnish the assessee with copies of statements examine the deponents and furnish the assessee with copies of statements and disclose material, these were and disclose material, these were denied to him. 22. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances and legal 22. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances and legal 22. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances and legal prepositions as discussed by us above, we direct the AO to delete the addition, prepositions as discussed by us above, we direct the AO to delete the addition, prepositions as discussed by us above, we direct the AO to delete the addition, consequently these grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.” consequently these grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.” consequently these grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.” 7.3 From the foregoing discussion, it is evident that the addition foregoing discussion, it is evident that the addition foregoing discussion, it is evident that the addition in the present case has been made merely on the basis of in the present case has been made merely on the basis of in the present case has been made merely on the basis of statements recorded during the search in the case of the RHIL statements recorded during the search in the case of the RHIL statements recorded during the search in the case of the RHIL group, without any corroborative material establishing payment of group, without any corroborative material establishing payment of group, without any corroborative material establishing payment of on-money by the assessee. In our considered view, such addition ssessee. In our considered view, such addition ssessee. In our considered view, such addition cannot be sustained in law. cannot be sustained in law.

7.4 Respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench in Respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench in Respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Pravin Khetaram Purohit (supra) Pravin Khetaram Purohit (supra), which pertains to , which pertains to the same search, the same project and identical facts, and there the same search, the same project and identical fac the same search, the same project and identical fac being no distinguishing feature brought to our notice, we hold that being no distinguishing feature brought to our notice, we hold that being no distinguishing feature brought to our notice, we hold that the addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the the addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the the addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the learned CIT(A) is unsustainable. Accordingly, the same is directed learned CIT(A) is unsustainable. Accordingly, the same is directed learned CIT(A) is unsustainable. Accordingly, the same is directed to be deleted. The grounds raised by the as to be deleted. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. sessee are allowed.

ITA No. 430/MUM/2026 ITA 17 Manjudevi Suresh Purohit Manjudevi Suresh Purohit

Order pronounced in the open Co ounced in the open Court on 28/0 /04/2026.

Sd/- - Sd/ Sd/- (ANIKESH BANERJEE ANIKESH BANERJEE) (OM PRAKASH KANT OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 28/04/2026 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai ITAT, Mumbai