RAJESH B. JAIN AS LEGAL HEIR OF BHANWARLAL M. JAIN,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 19(1)(1), MUMBAI

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of alleged addition of alleged unexplained cash commission income of Rs. 8,26,30,691/ unexplained cash commission income of Rs. 8,26,30,691/ unexplained cash commission income of Rs. 8,26,30,691/- u/s 69A for allegedly providing accommodation entries through 70 alleged for allegedly providing accommodation entries through 70 alleged for allegedly providing accommodation entries through 70 alleged benami concerns without appreciating the fact that the appellant is benami concerns without appreciating the fact that the appellant is benami concerns without appreciating the fact that the appellant is managing only those concerns where the managing only those concerns where the appellant himself is appellant himself is proprietor/partner/director and that there is no evidence to hold proprietor/partner/director and that there is no evidence to hold proprietor/partner/director and that there is no evidence to hold that the said 70 concerns were controlled by the appellant. that the said 70 concerns were controlled by the appellant. that the said 70 concerns were controlled by the appellant.

4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of alleged commission income solely on the basis of search action on appellant commission income solely on the basis of search action on appellant commission income solely on the basis of search action on appellant without appreciating the fact that the appellant has retracted the without appreciating the fact that the appellant has retracted the without appreciating the fact that the appellant has retracted the statement given before Investigation Wing, Mumbai as the same statement given before Investigation Wing, Mumbai as the same statement given before Investigation Wing, Mumbai as the same was taken under coercion and without the consent was taken under coercion and without the consent of the appellant. of the appellant.

7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in relying on the confessional statements of learned CIT(A) erred in relying on the confessional statements of learned CIT(A) erred in relying on the confessional statements of various persons of the alleged concerns without granting any various persons of the alleged concerns without granting any various persons of the alleged concerns without granting any opportunity to the appellant t opportunity to the appellant to cross examine the partner/ director/ o cross examine the partner/ director/ proprietor of the alleged 70 controlled entities. proprietor of the alleged 70 controlled entities.

8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the assessing officer without appreciating the fa assessing officer without appreciating the fact that the assessing ct that the assessing officer is extrapolating material pertaining to other years in the officer is extrapolating material pertaining to other years in the officer is extrapolating material pertaining to other years in the present assessment year, without providing any corroborative present assessment year, without providing any corroborative present assessment year, without providing any corroborative evidences and making the addition on estimation purely on the evidences and making the addition on estimation purely on the evidences and making the addition on estimation purely on the basis of surmises. basis of surmises.

9. On the facts and circ . On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the umstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the retractions made by the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the retractions made by the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the retractions made by the appellant against the statement recorded under section 132(4) of appellant against the statement recorded under section 132(4) of appellant against the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the the Act, without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the the Act, without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.

2.1 The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from representing the matter on was prevented by sufficient cause from representing was prevented by sufficient cause from representing the scheduled date. It is argued that the failure of the Ld. CIT(A) to the scheduled date. It is argued that the failure of the Ld. CIT(A) to the scheduled date. It is argued that the failure of the Ld. CIT(A) to take cognizance of the adjournment request effectively deprived the take cognizance of the adjournment request effectively deprived the take cognizance of the adjournment request effectively deprived the assessee of the right to be heard. The assessee seeks a remand of assessee of the right to be heard. The assessee seeks a remand of assessee of the right to be heard. The assessee seeks a remand of the matter to ensure a fair opportuni the matter to ensure a fair opportunity to place documentary ty to place documentary evidence on record.

Rajesh B. Jain as Legal Heir of Bhanwarlal Jain Rajesh B. Jain as Legal Heir of Bhanwarlal Jain Per contra, the Revenue supports the impugned order, noting Per contra, the Revenue supports the impugned order, noting Per contra, the Revenue supports the impugned order, noting that the Ld. CIT(A) was compelled to sustain the additions made by that the Ld. CIT(A) was compelled to sustain the additions made by that the Ld. CIT(A) was compelled to sustain the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as the assessee had failed to avail of the Assessing Officer (AO) as the assessee had failed to avail of the Assessing Officer (AO) as the assessee had failed to avail of multiple opportunities previously granted. tunities previously granted.

3.1 It is a settled principle of law that the "Right to be Heard" is It is a settled principle of law that the "Right to be Heard" is It is a settled principle of law that the "Right to be Heard" is not a mere ritualistic formality but a substantive right. Judicial and not a mere ritualistic formality but a substantive right. Judicial and not a mere ritualistic formality but a substantive right. Judicial and quasi-judicial authorities must ensure that orders are not only fair ial authorities must ensure that orders are not only fair ial authorities must ensure that orders are not only fair but appear to be fair. While the Ld. CIT(A) is within his rights to but appear to be fair. While the Ld. CIT(A) is within his rights to but appear to be fair. While the Ld. CIT(A) is within his rights to curb dilatory tactics, the inadvertent overlooking of a formal curb dilatory tactics, the inadvertent overlooking of a formal curb dilatory tactics, the inadvertent overlooking of a formal adjournment application results in a technical breach of the adjournment application results in a technical breach of the adjournment application results in a technical breach of the principles of natural justice. ples of natural justice.

3.2 We are of the considered view that justice should not be We are of the considered view that justice should not be We are of the considered view that justice should not be sacrificed at the altar of technicalities or procedural haste. In our sacrificed at the altar of technicalities or procedural haste. sacrificed at the altar of technicalities or procedural haste. opinion, to subserve the ends of justice, the assessee deserves a subserve the ends of justice, the assessee deserves a subserve the ends of justice, the assessee deserves a final opportunity to substantiate final opportunity to substantiate its claims through relevant its claims through relevant submissions and documentary evidence. submissions and documentary evidence.

Rajesh B. Jain as Legal Heir of Bhanwarlal Jain Rajesh B. Jain as Legal Heir of Bhanwarlal Jain In light of the facts and circumstances discussed above, we In light of the facts and circumstances discussed above, we In light of the facts and circumstances discussed above, we find it appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). find it appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). find it appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). The matter is hereby restored to the file of the Ld. CI The matter is hereby to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for a de novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue afresh after providing a reasonable and effective opportunity of afresh after providing a reasonable and effective opportunity of afresh after providing a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. being heard to the assessee.

Order pronounced in the open Court on ounced in the open Court on 23/02/2026. /02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/ (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (OM PRAKASH KANT OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 23/02/2026 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.