DONA BUILDERS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5374/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 January 2026AY 2011-1231 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

The assessee, Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, faced reassessment proceedings for assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14. The reassessment was initiated based on information suggesting the assessee received accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loans and share application money from entities allegedly controlled by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain.

Held

The Tribunal upheld the validity of the reassessment proceedings. However, it found that the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) had not conducted sufficient independent enquiries regarding the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions related to the unsecured loans and share application money. Therefore, these issues were restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

Key Issues

1. Validity of reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of investigation findings. 2. Addition of share application money and unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 without proper verification.

Sections Cited

147, 148, 68, 143(3), 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh Shah, Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/w, Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, CIT DR

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah, Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/w, Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, CIT DR

Pronounced: 06/11/2025

ORDER PER BENCH These five appeals by the assessee are directed against separate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011 11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively 14 respectively. As common issue-in-dispute dispute is involved and therefore same were heard same were heard together and disposed of and disposed off by way of this consolidated order for sake of connivance consolidated order for sake of connivance and avoid repetition and avoid repetition of facts.

2. Firstly, we take up the appeal for the assessment year 2009 we take up the appeal for the assessment year 2009- we take up the appeal for the assessment year 2009 10. The grounds raised

by the raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: reproduced as under: “1. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in c NFAC erred in confirming the reopening of the onfirming the reopening of the assessment.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO had On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO had On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO had wrongly reopened the assessment on wrong facts, without proper wrongly reopened the assessment on wrong facts, without proper wrongly reopened the assessment on wrong facts, without proper sanction from the prescribed authority and on borrowed opinion and sanction from the prescribed authority and on borrowed opinion and sanction from the prescribed authority and on borrowed opinion and without complying the provisions of Section 147 to 151 of the Act. without complying the provisions of Section 147 to 151 of t without complying the provisions of Section 147 to 151 of t 3. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs 20,00,000/- being share application money received from Sumukh being share application money received from Sumukh Commercial Pvt Ltd though no such amount was received during Commercial Pvt Ltd though no such amount was received during Commercial Pvt Ltd though no such amount was received during the year. b) The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the issue and b) The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the issue and b) The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the issue and confirmed the total addition on assumption and presumption basis confirmed the total addition on assumption and presumption basis confirmed the total addition on assumption and presumption basis and without going into the details submitted during the appellate and without going into the details submitted during the appellate and without going into the details submitted during the appellate proceedings. proceedings. 4. a) On the facts and circumstances a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs. NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,60,00,000 under Section 68 of the Act without going into the 1,60,00,000 under Section 68 of the Act without going into the 1,60,00,000 under Section 68 of the Act without going into the details and the total additions in respect of unsecured loans were details and the total additions in respect of unsecured loans were details and the total additions in respect of unsecured loans were confirmed by way of surmise and conjec confirmed by way of surmise and conjecture. b) The CIT(A) b) The CIT(A)-NFAC erred in not considering the detailed NFAC erred in not considering the detailed submissions filed though the same was incorporated in the submissions filed though the same was incorporated in the submissions filed though the same was incorporated in the CIT(A)'s order. CIT(A)'s order.

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 3.2 It has further been explained that the assessee remained It has further been explained that the assessee remained It has further been explained that the assessee remained unaware of the said order, as no communication was received. unaware of the said order, as no communication was received. unaware of the said order, as no communication was received. Other appeals pertaining to subsequent assessment years were also Other appeals pertaining to subsequent assessment years were also Other appeals pertaining to subsequent assessment years were also pending simultaneously, and the pending simultaneously, and the orders in those matters were orders in those matters were received on 20.06.2025. Upon receipt of those orders, the assessee received on 20.06.2025. Upon receipt of those orders, the assessee received on 20.06.2025. Upon receipt of those orders, the assessee verified the e-filing portal and, to its surprise, discovered that the filing portal and, to its surprise, discovered that the filing portal and, to its surprise, discovered that the impugned order for Assessment Year 2009 impugned order for Assessment Year 2009-10 had already been 10 had already been passed on 27.07.2023 and was passed on 27.07.2023 and was available on the portal. The available on the portal. The assessee thus became aware of the impugned order only on assessee thus became aware of the impugned order only on assessee thus became aware of the impugned order only on 20.06.2025, thereafter the order was downloaded and the present hereafter the order was downloaded and the present hereafter the order was downloaded and the present appeal was filed on 29.08.2025. It is asserted that the delay was appeal was filed on 29.08.2025. It is asserted that the delay was appeal was filed on 29.08.2025. It is asserted that the delay was neither deliberate nor motivated, and t neither deliberate nor motivated, and that no advantage accrued to hat no advantage accrued to the assessee on account of such delay. the assessee on account of such delay.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of real estate development. For the engaged in the business of real estate development. For the engaged in the business of real estate development. For the assessment year under consideration, the assessee filed its return assessment year under consideration, the assessee filed its return assessment year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 28.09.2009 declaring a total income of ₹1,25,81,550/– of income on 28.09.2009 declaring a total income of of income on 28.09.2009 declaring a total income of . The said return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income- . The said return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income . The said return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 4.1 Subsequently, Subsequently, Subsequently, the the the learned learned learned Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer received received received information from the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax information from the Investigation Wing of the Income information from the Investigation Wing of the Income Department alleging Department alleging that the assessee had obtained accommodation that the assessee had obtained accommodation entries in the nature of unsecured loans and share application entries in the nature of unsecured loans and share application entries in the nature of unsecured loans and share application money from certain concerns controlled and managed by Shri money from certain concerns controlled and managed by Shri money from certain concerns controlled and managed by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain, who was subjected to search proceedings by Praveen Kumar Jain, who was subjected to search proceedings by Praveen Kumar Jain, who was subjected to search proceedings by the Department. During the the Department. During the course of the search, it was observed course of the search, it was observed that Shri Praveen Kumar Jain was operating and controlling several that Shri Praveen Kumar Jain was operating and controlling several that Shri Praveen Kumar Jain was operating and controlling several entities in the names of his employees and associates. Statements entities in the names of his employees and associates. Statements entities in the names of his employees and associates. Statements recorded during the search revealed that the directors and partners recorded during the search revealed that the directors and partners recorded during the search revealed that the directors and partners of such entities were merely name were merely name-lenders and that the said lenders and that the said concerns were allegedly used for providing bogus accommodation concerns were allegedly used for providing bogus accommodation concerns were allegedly used for providing bogus accommodation entries. It was further observed that no stock of goods or evidence of entries. It was further observed that no stock of goods or evidence of entries. It was further observed that no stock of goods or evidence of Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 genuine business activity was found at the premises of such genuine business activity was found at the premises of such genuine business activity was found at the premises of such concerns.

Commercial Pvt Ltd Share application money Share application money 6 M/s Sumukh 2009 2009-2010 SHARE 20,00,000 2 Commercial APPLICATION Pvt Ltd MONEY Total 1,80,00,000/- 1,80,00,000/ 4.3 In view of the said information, the learned Assessing Officer In view of the said information, the learned Assessing Officer In view of the said information, the learned Assessing Officer recorded reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had recorded reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had recorded reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment escaped assessment and accordingly issued notice under section and accordingly issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the original return of income filed on 28.09.2009 be treated as the original return of income filed on 28.09.2009 be treated as the original return of income filed on 28.09.2009 be treated as the return filed in response to the said notice. Thereafter, statutory return filed in response to the said notice. Thereafter, statutory return filed in response to the said notice. Thereafter, statutory notices were issued and reassessment proceedings were initiated. issued and reassessment proceedings were initiated. issued and reassessment proceedings were initiated. 4.4 During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee contested During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee contested During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee contested the allegations on multiple grounds. It was submitted, inter alia, the allegations on multiple grounds. It was submitted, inter alia, the allegations on multiple grounds. It was submitted, inter alia, that the allegation of accommodation entries was based merely on that the allegation of accommodation entries was based merely on that the allegation of accommodation entries was based merely on abstracts of statements of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his ts of statements of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his ts of statements of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his associates, without furnishing complete statements, and that none associates, without furnishing complete statements, and that none associates, without furnishing complete statements, and that none of the statements specifically named the assessee. It was further of the statements specifically named the assessee. It was further of the statements specifically named the assessee. It was further contended that the statements relied upon by the Assessing Officer contended that the statements relied upon by the Assessing Officer contended that the statements relied upon by the Assessing Officer had subsequently been retracted. The assessee claimed to have ubsequently been retracted. The assessee claimed to have ubsequently been retracted. The assessee claimed to have furnished comprehensive documentary evidence in support of the furnished comprehensive documentary evidence in support of the furnished comprehensive documentary evidence in support of the ₹1,60,00,000/ unsecured unsecured loans loans amounting amounting to to 1,60,00,000/–, including confirmations, PAN details, income confirmations, PAN details, income-tax returns, bank statements of tax returns, bank statements of both the lenders and the assessee, ledger accounts, board rs and the assessee, ledger accounts, board rs and the assessee, ledger accounts, board

Before us the assessee, by way of Ground Nos. 1 and 2, has Before us the assessee, by way of Ground Nos. 1 and 2, has Before us the assessee, by way of Ground Nos. 1 and 2, has challenged the validity of reopening of the assessment under section challenged the validity of reopening of the assessment under section challenged the validity of reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. tax Act, 1961. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that the reopening The learned counsel for the assessee contended that the reopening The learned counsel for the assessee contended that the reopening is vitiated due to non is vitiated due to non-application of mind. It was submitted that application of mind. It was submitted that while recording reasons, the Assessing Officer proceeded on the while recording reasons, the Assessing Officer proceeded on the while recording reasons, the Assessing Officer proceeded on the premise that the assessee had received share application money of premise that the assessee had received share application mon premise that the assessee had received share application mon ₹20,00,000/– from M/s. Sumukh Commercial Pvt. Ltd., whereas, from M/s. Sumukh Commercial Pvt. Ltd., whereas, from M/s. Sumukh Commercial Pvt. Ltd., whereas, according to the assessee, no such share application money was according to the assessee, no such share application money was according to the assessee, no such share application money was received during the relevant previous year nor reflected in the books received during the relevant previous year nor reflected in the books received during the relevant previous year nor reflected in the books of account. It was argued that the reasons were recorded without of account. It was argued that the reasons were recorded of account. It was argued that the reasons were recorded verifying this basic factual aspect, rendering the belief erroneous verifying this basic factual aspect, rendering the belief erroneous verifying this basic factual aspect, rendering the belief erroneous and unsustainable in law. It was further contended that the and unsustainable in law. It was further contended that the and unsustainable in law. It was further contended that the sanction accorded under section 151 was equally defective, as the sanction accorded under section 151 was equally defective, as the sanction accorded under section 151 was equally defective, as the approving authority also failed to notice the absence of any such approving authority also failed to notice the absence approving authority also failed to notice the absence share application money, thereby granting approval mechanically. share application money, thereby granting approval mechanically. share application money, thereby granting approval mechanically. The learned counsel also submitted that the reopening was based The learned counsel also submitted that the reopening was based The learned counsel also submitted that the reopening was based on a borrowed satisfaction of the Investigation Wing, without on a borrowed satisfaction of the Investigation Wing, without on a borrowed satisfaction of the Investigation Wing, without independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer. independent application of mind by the Assessing Off independent application of mind by the Assessing Off

We have carefully considered the rival submissions and We have carefully considered the rival submissions and We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee had before Ld. CIT(A). the material on record. The assessee had before Ld. CIT(A). the material on record. The assessee had before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee challanging The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee challanging The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee challanging the validity of the reassessment observing as under: the validity of the reassessment observing as under: 6.2 As regards the grounds relating to objection of the reopening of 6.2 As regards the grounds relating to objection of the reopening of 6.2 As regards the grounds relating to objection of the reopening of assessment, it is essential to bear it in mind that the return of income for ment, it is essential to bear it in mind that the return of income for ment, it is essential to bear it in mind that the return of income for the AY 2009-10 was never subjected to scrutiny earlier. In one ground the 10 was never subjected to scrutiny earlier. In one ground the 10 was never subjected to scrutiny earlier. In one ground the assessee says that the AO has not obtained the permission of higher assessee says that the AO has not obtained the permission of higher assessee says that the AO has not obtained the permission of higher authorities. In another ground it says that authorities. In another ground it says that permission taken from the permission taken from the higher authority u/s.151 is also based on wrong facts. This shows that the higher authority u/s.151 is also based on wrong facts. This shows that the higher authority u/s.151 is also based on wrong facts. This shows that the permission was given mechanically and without application of mind. permission was given mechanically and without application of mind. permission was given mechanically and without application of mind. There is inconsistency in the submissions. The former ground contradicts There is inconsistency in the submissions. The former ground contradicts There is inconsistency in the submissions. The former ground contradicts with the latter ground. This shows that the assessee misrepresents the er ground. This shows that the assessee misrepresents the er ground. This shows that the assessee misrepresents the facts and wants the appellate authority somehow to decide the appeal in facts and wants the appellate authority somehow to decide the appeal in facts and wants the appellate authority somehow to decide the appeal in its favour. The contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer did its favour. The contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer did its favour. The contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer did not demonstrate any material enabling him to form a belief that income not demonstrate any material enabling him to form a not demonstrate any material enabling him to form a chargeable to tax has escaped assessment is fallacious. The Assessing chargeable to tax has escaped assessment is fallacious. The Assessing chargeable to tax has escaped assessment is fallacious. The Assessing

During the course of search proceeding, statement of Shri Praveen 3. During the course of search proceeding, statement of S 3. During the course of search proceeding, statement of S Kumar Jain was recorded u/s. 132(4) of the IT. Act, 1961, in which he Kumar Jain was recorded u/s. 132(4) of the IT. Act, 1961, in which he Kumar Jain was recorded u/s. 132(4) of the IT. Act, 1961, in which he stated that he is engaged in the business of giving accommodation entries stated that he is engaged in the business of giving accommodation entries stated that he is engaged in the business of giving accommodation entries in the shape of bogus unsecured loan, bogus share application on share in the shape of bogus unsecured loan, bogus share application on share in the shape of bogus unsecured loan, bogus share application on share capital money, bogus bills of capital money, bogus bills of LTCG/STCG and bogus bills of purchase LTCG/STCG and bogus bills of purchase which are routed through the companies under his control. All the which are routed through the companies under his control. All the which are routed through the companies under his control. All the companies either owned by him or directly/indirectly under his control are companies either owned by him or directly/indirectly under his control are companies either owned by him or directly/indirectly under his control are paper companies with no real business transactions. In most of these paper companies with no real business transactions. In most of these paper companies with no real business transactions. In most of these cases, various various various brokers brokers brokers who who who operate operate operate in in in the the the field field field of of of providing providing providing accommodation entries approach him when they want a certain type of accommodation entries approach him when they want a certain type of accommodation entries approach him when they want a certain type of accommodation entry like bogus unsecured loan, bogus share application accommodation entry like bogus unsecured loan, bogus share application accommodation entry like bogus unsecured loan, bogus share application on share capital money, bogus LTCG/STCG and bogus bills of purchase on share capital money, bogus LTCG/STCG and bogus bills of purc on share capital money, bogus LTCG/STCG and bogus bills of purc etc. He has also given the list of his group companies in his statement etc. He has also given the list of his group companies in his statement etc. He has also given the list of his group companies in his statement admitting the fact that accommodation entries have been provided to the admitting the fact that accommodation entries have been provided to the admitting the fact that accommodation entries have been provided to the various beneficiaries. This list contains the names of these companies who various beneficiaries. This list contains the names of these companies who various beneficiaries. This list contains the names of these companies who have provided accommodation entr have provided accommodation entries totaling to Rs. 1,80,00,000/ ies totaling to Rs. 1,80,00,000/- to assessee under the garb of Share Application Money and Unsecure loans assessee under the garb of Share Application Money and Unsecure loans assessee under the garb of Share Application Money and Unsecure loans as under.

4. From the above facts, it is clear that the assessee had booked bogus 4. From the above facts, it is clear that the assessee had booked bogus 4. From the above facts, it is clear that the assessee had booked bogus Share Application Money and bogus Unsecured Loans in its books of Share Application Money and bogus Unsecured Loans in its books of Share Application Money and bogus Unsecured Loans in its books of account to the tune of Rs. 20,00,000/ une of Rs. 20,00,000/-& Rs. 1,60,00,000/ & Rs. 1,60,00,000/- respectively. Thus, the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts Thus, the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts Thus, the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts in respect of Share Application Money as well as Unsecured Loans in respect of Share Application Money as well as Unsecured Loans in respect of Share Application Money as well as Unsecured Loans necessary for its assessment for the A.Y.2009 necessary for its assessment for the A.Y.2009-10 and has s 10 and has suppressed its income chargeable to tax. In view of the above, I have reason to believe income chargeable to tax. In view of the above, I have reason to believe income chargeable to tax. In view of the above, I have reason to believe that in the case of the assessee, income chargeable to tax of that in the case of the assessee, income chargeable to tax of that in the case of the assessee, income chargeable to tax of Rs.1,80,00,000/- has escaped assessment for A.Y.2009 has escaped assessment for A.Y.2009-10 within the meaning of sec. 147 of the I.T. Act, 196 meaning of sec. 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961." 7.3 On a plain reading of the reasons, it is evident that the On a plain reading of the reasons, it is evident that the On a plain reading of the reasons, it is evident that the Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer received received received specific specific specific information information information from from from the the the Investigation Wing pursuant to a search conducted in the case of Investigation Wing pursuant to a search conducted in the case of Investigation Wing pursuant to a search conducted in the case of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his group concerns, wherein it was Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his group concerns, wherein it was Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his group concerns, wherein it was admitted that several entities controlled by him were engaged in several entities controlled by him were engaged in several entities controlled by him were engaged in providing accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loans providing accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loans providing accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loans and share application money. The information furnished to the and share application money. The information furnished to the and share application money. The information furnished to the Assessing Officer specifically named the concerns from whom the Assessing Officer specifically named the concerns from whom the Assessing Officer specifically named the concerns from whom the assessee was stated to have received accommodation entries ated to have received accommodation entries ated to have received accommodation entries aggregating to ₹1,80,00,000/ 1,80,00,000/–. On the basis of such information, . On the basis of such information, the Assessing Officer formed a belief that income chargeable to tax the Assessing Officer formed a belief that income chargeable to tax the Assessing Officer formed a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. had escaped assessment.

7.5 According to ld counsel for the assessee, recording of reasons According to ld counsel for the assessee, recording of reasons According to ld counsel for the assessee, recording of reasons to believe that income escaped without verifying the fact of share to believe that income escaped without verifying the fact of share to believe that income escaped without verifying the fact of share application money amounts to non appl application money amounts to non application of mind by the ld ication of mind by the ld AO. The contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer ought The contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer ought The contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer ought to have verified whether share application money of ₹20,00,000/– to have verified whether share application money of to have verified whether share application money of was actually received before recording reasons cannot be accepted. was actually received before recording reasons cannot be accepted. was actually received before recording reasons cannot be accepted. At the threshold stage, the As At the threshold stage, the Assessing Officer is not required to sessing Officer is not required to conclusively establish escapement of income or adjudicate upon conclusively establish escapement of income or adjudicate upon conclusively establish escapement of income or adjudicate upon disputed facts. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not disputed facts. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not disputed facts. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not open to judicial scrutiny at this stage, as consistently held by the open to judicial scrutiny at this stage, as consistently held by the open to judicial scrutiny at this stage, as consistently held by the Hon’ble Supreme Cou Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. and Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd.. The belief formed by the Assessing . The belief formed by the Assessing Officer is based on information received from a credible source, Officer is based on information received from a credible source Officer is based on information received from a credible source namely the Investigation Wing and information or material was namely the Investigation Wing and information or material was namely the Investigation Wing and information or material was Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 relevant to the case in hand , relevant to the case in hand , and cannot be said to be a case of and cannot be said to be a case of mere suspicion or conjecture. mere suspicion or conjecture.

7.6 Further, the reasons recorded demonstrate independent Further, the reasons recorded demonstrate independent Further, the reasons recorded demonstrate independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer to the information application of mind by the Assessing Officer to the information application of mind by the Assessing Officer to the information received. The formation of belief is received. The formation of belief is not mechanical nor based on not mechanical nor based on borrowed satisfaction, but on an objective appraisal of material borrowed satisfaction, but on an objective appraisal of material borrowed satisfaction, but on an objective appraisal of material linking the assessee with the alleged accommodation entries. The linking the assessee with the alleged accommodation entries. The linking the assessee with the alleged accommodation entries. The mere fact that one component of the information is disputed by the mere fact that one component of the information is disputed by the mere fact that one component of the information is disputed by the assessee does not render the en assessee does not render the entire reopening invalid. tire reopening invalid. As regards the approval granted under section 151, we find no As regards the approval granted under section 151, we find no As regards the approval granted under section 151, we find no merit merit merit in in in the the the allegation allegation allegation that that that the the the sanction sanction sanction was was was accorded accorded accorded mechanically. The approving authority granted sanction on the mechanically. The approving authority granted sanction on the mechanically. The approving authority granted sanction on the basis of the reasons recorded and the material placed before it. At basis of the reasons recorded and the material placed basis of the reasons recorded and the material placed this stage, the approving authority is not required to conduct an this stage, the approving authority is not required to conduct an this stage, the approving authority is not required to conduct an independent investigation into the factual correctness of each entry, independent investigation into the factual correctness of each entry, independent investigation into the factual correctness of each entry, but only to examine whether a prima facie case exists for reopening. but only to examine whether a prima facie case exists for reopening. but only to examine whether a prima facie case exists for reopening. We find no infirmity in the sanction We find no infirmity in the sanction so granted.

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 had obtained unsecured loans from various entities controlled and had obtained unsecured loans from various entities controlled and had obtained unsecured loans from various entities controlled and managed by the Shri Praveen Kumar Jain Group. The details of managed by the Shri Praveen Kumar Jain Group. The details of managed by the Shri Praveen Kumar Jain Group. The details of such loans received during the year have already been noted such loans received during the year have already been noted such loans received during the year have already been noted hereinabove. The assessee claimed that the loans were genuine and hereinabove. The assessee claimed that the loans were genuine and hereinabove. The assessee claimed that the loans were genuine and submitted documentary evidence in support thereof. ubmitted documentary evidence in support thereof. ubmitted documentary evidence in support thereof. 9.2 The Assessing Officer, however, relied heavily on the findings The Assessing Officer, however, relied heavily on the findings The Assessing Officer, however, relied heavily on the findings emanating from the search and seizure proceedings conducted in emanating from the search and seizure proceedings conducted in emanating from the search and seizure proceedings conducted in the case of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his associates. It was the case of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his associates. It was the case of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his associates. It was observed that at the business premises and registered addresses of at the business premises and registered addresses of at the business premises and registered addresses of the lending concerns, as per income the lending concerns, as per income-tax records, MCA data and tax records, MCA data and bank documents, no genuine business activity was found to be bank documents, no genuine business activity was found to be bank documents, no genuine business activity was found to be carried out. Statements recorded under sections 132(4) and 131 of carried out. Statements recorded under sections 132(4) and 131 of carried out. Statements recorded under sections 132(4) and 131 of the Act revealed that the directors and proprietors of such concerns led that the directors and proprietors of such concerns led that the directors and proprietors of such concerns admitted to being mere name admitted to being mere name-lenders or dummy directors, who lenders or dummy directors, who signed documents for nominal consideration at the instance of Shri signed documents for nominal consideration at the instance of Shri signed documents for nominal consideration at the instance of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain. It was further noted that no physical stock of Praveen Kumar Jain. It was further noted that no physical stock of Praveen Kumar Jain. It was further noted that no physical stock of goods was found during search or survey proceedings and that was found during search or survey proceedings and that was found during search or survey proceedings and that such concerns had no employees except a few common accountants such concerns had no employees except a few common accountants such concerns had no employees except a few common accountants who managed their accounts and banking transactions. who managed their accounts and banking transactions. who managed their accounts and banking transactions.

“6.4 Respectfully following the above decisions, I have no hesitation 6.4 Respectfully following the above decisions, I have no hesitation 6.4 Respectfully following the above decisions, I have no hesitation to uphold the action of the AO in reopening the assessment. All the grounds uphold the action of the AO in reopening the assessment. All the grounds uphold the action of the AO in reopening the assessment. All the grounds relating to reopening of assessment are hereby dismissed.” relating to reopening of assessment are hereby dismissed. relating to reopening of assessment are hereby dismissed. It can be seen from the above that even though the reassessment It can be seen from the above that even though the reassessment It can be seen from the above that even though the reassessment proceedings were started in 30.3.2016, the documentary evidences were proceedings were started in 30.3.2016, the documentary evidences were proceedings were started in 30.3.2016, the documentary evidences were completed the assessment. To bring forth the non completed the assessment. To bring forth the non-cooperative attitude of cooperative attitude of the submitted at the eleventh hour the submitted at the eleventh hour ie. on 30.12.2016 on which day the AO 016 on which day the AO assessee its own submission is quoted here for ready reference. assessee its own submission is quoted here for ready reference. assessee its own submission is quoted here for ready reference. "In response, the assessee's AR submitted on 30.12.2016 loan "In response, the assessee's AR submitted on 30.12.2016 loan "In response, the assessee's AR submitted on 30.12.2016 loan confirmation, ledger account bank statement. ITR copy along confirmation, ledger account bank statement. ITR copy along confirmation, ledger account bank statement. ITR copy along with audited accounts of the above parties" with audited accounts of the above parties" This clearly indicates that the assessee did not want to give the AO his clearly indicates that the assessee did not want to give the AO his clearly indicates that the assessee did not want to give the AO sufficient time to enquire, cross verify and investigate on the veracity of the sufficient time to enquire, cross verify and investigate on the veracity of the sufficient time to enquire, cross verify and investigate on the veracity of the assessee's submission vis assessee's submission vis-à-vis the documentary evidences produced. The vis the documentary evidences produced. The intention of the assessee is clear t intention of the assessee is clear that it wanted to entangle the AO, who hat it wanted to entangle the AO, who was having very limited time at his disposal, thereby placed the latter in was having very limited time at his disposal, thereby placed the latter in was having very limited time at his disposal, thereby placed the latter in such a situation whereby he could not have any opportunity but to accept such a situation whereby he could not have any opportunity but to accept such a situation whereby he could not have any opportunity but to accept the documentary evidences as it is and complete the assessment as the documentary evidences as it is and complete the assessment as the documentary evidences as it is and complete the assessment as intended by the assessee. That is the reason for submitting the evidences nded by the assessee. That is the reason for submitting the evidences nded by the assessee. That is the reason for submitting the evidences on the last day. The assessee is not a non on the last day. The assessee is not a non-prudent person who cannot prudent person who cannot visualize the situation and guess what would be the documents the AO visualize the situation and guess what would be the documents the AO visualize the situation and guess what would be the documents the AO would require to accept its claim as genuine, if would require to accept its claim as genuine, if it is so. That being the case it is so. That being the case the assessee could have, at the first instance itself, even without waiting the assessee could have, at the first instance itself, even without waiting the assessee could have, at the first instance itself, even without waiting for the AO to call for the same through a notice under Section 142(1), for the AO to call for the same through a notice under Section 142(1), for the AO to call for the same through a notice under Section 142(1), furnished all the documentary evidences on which it relied upon in support furnished all the documentary evidences on which it relied upon in support furnished all the documentary evidences on which it relied upon in support

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 of its claim. This could certainly be possible since there was no need to its claim. This could certainly be possible since there was no need to its claim. This could certainly be possible since there was no need to generate or create any new document had the assessee's claim is genuine, generate or create any new document had the assessee's claim is genuine, generate or create any new document had the assessee's claim is genuine, inasmuch as the assessment year is 2009 inasmuch as the assessment year is 2009-10 and the reassessment 10 and the reassessment proceedings started only in 2016. This itself sh proceedings started only in 2016. This itself shows that the entire ows that the entire transaction of loan and share application money is nothing but bogus and transaction of loan and share application money is nothing but bogus and transaction of loan and share application money is nothing but bogus and sham. Thus the assessee expected the AD, who would be in a hurry to assessee expected the AD, who would be in a hurry to assessee expected the AD, who would be in a hurry to complete the assessment before 31.12.2016 would have no other complete the assessment before 31.12.2016 would have no other complete the assessment before 31.12.2016 would have no other alternative than to accept the do alternative than to accept the documents and pass an order without cuments and pass an order without making any addition. Of course this did not happen. making any addition. Of course this did not happen. The AO elaborately discussed in the assessment order the outcome of the The AO elaborately discussed in the assessment order the outcome of the The AO elaborately discussed in the assessment order the outcome of the search by the Investigation Wing, which brought the following facts: search by the Investigation Wing, which brought the following facts: search by the Investigation Wing, which brought the following facts: In many concerns formed by In many concerns formed by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain group, Shri Praveen Kumar Jain group, various persons shown to be the directors / proprietors were non various persons shown to be the directors / proprietors were non various persons shown to be the directors / proprietors were non- existent on the given addresses. In certain cases in the sworn existent on the given addresses. In certain cases in the sworn existent on the given addresses. In certain cases in the sworn statements recorded u/s. 132(4)/131 of the I.T.Act these directors / statements recorded u/s. 132(4)/131 of the I.T.Act these directors / statements recorded u/s. 132(4)/131 of the I.T.Act these directors / proprietors admitted that th proprietors admitted that they were merely dummy directors and ey were merely dummy directors and used to sign different papers for nominal consideration given by Shri used to sign different papers for nominal consideration given by Shri used to sign different papers for nominal consideration given by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain. Praveen Kumar Jain. In view of the above, it is seen that through various dummy directors In view of the above, it is seen that through various dummy directors In view of the above, it is seen that through various dummy directors /proprietors, he controls, operates and manages a large numb /proprietors, he controls, operates and manages a large numb /proprietors, he controls, operates and manages a large number of concerns All such concerns are not carrying out any genuine concerns All such concerns are not carrying out any genuine concerns All such concerns are not carrying out any genuine business. They do not have any physical stock of goods which they business. They do not have any physical stock of goods which they business. They do not have any physical stock of goods which they claimed to be dealing in, all such concerns have no employees claimed to be dealing in, all such concerns have no employees claimed to be dealing in, all such concerns have no employees except a few common accountants who manage accounts and except a few common accountants who manage accounts and except a few common accountants who manage accounts and banking transactions of all such concerns. All such concerns are g transactions of all such concerns. All such concerns are g transactions of all such concerns. All such concerns are indulged in the activity of providing accommodation entries only. indulged in the activity of providing accommodation entries only. indulged in the activity of providing accommodation entries only.

9.5 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in The Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in CIT v. Jansampark CIT v. Jansampark Advertising and Marketing (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 525/2014), has (ITA No. 525/2014), has Advertising and Marketing (P) Ltd. categorically held that where the Assessing Officer fails to conduct categorically held that where the Assessing Officer fails to conduct categorically held that where the Assessing Officer fails to conduct proper enquiry, the first appellate authority cannot remain passive proper enquiry, the first appellate authority cannot remain passive proper enquiry, the first appellate authority cannot remain passive and is duty-bound to ensure that necessary and effective enquiry is bound to ensure that necessary and effective enquiry is bound to ensure that necessary and effective enquiry is carried out, either by its carried out, either by itself or by directing the Assessing Officer to elf or by directing the Assessing Officer to do so. The appellate authority cannot uphold or delete an addition do so. The appellate authority cannot uphold or delete an addition do so. The appellate authority cannot uphold or delete an addition merely on the ground of inadequacy of enquiry without first merely on the ground of inadequacy of enquiry without first merely on the ground of inadequacy of enquiry without first remedying such deficiency. remedying such deficiency. The relevant part of decision is The relevant part of decision is reproduced as under: reproduced as under: 42. The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a . The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a . The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT (Appeals), proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT (Appeals), proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT (Appeals), having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter simply by allowing the appeal and deleting the additions made. It was simply by allowing the appeal and de leting the additions made. It was also the obligation of the first appellate authority, as indeed of ITAT, to also the obligation of the first appellate authority, as indeed of ITAT, to also the obligation of the first appellate authority, as indeed of ITAT, to have ensured that effective inquiry was carried out, particularly in the have ensured that effective inquiry was carried out, particularly in the have ensured that effective inquiry was carried out, particularly in the face of the allegations of the Revenue that the account statements reveal face of the allegations of the Revenue that the account statements reveal face of the allegations of the Revenue that the account statements reveal

“1 a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the reopening of the NFAC erred in confirming the reopening of the assessment. The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the assessment. The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the assessment. The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the ground in respect of the reopening of the assessment though the appellant in respect of the reopening of the assessment though the appellant in respect of the reopening of the assessment though the appellant had given a detailed response during the appellate proceedings. had given a detailed response during the appellate proceedings. had given a detailed response during the appellate proceedings. b) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO b) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO b) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO had wrongly reopened the assessment on wrong facts, w had wrongly reopened the assessment on wrong facts, w had wrongly reopened the assessment on wrong facts, without proper sanction from the prescribed authority and on borrowed proper sanction from the prescribed authority and on borrowed proper sanction from the prescribed authority and on borrowed opinion and without complying the provisions of Section 147 to 151 opinion and without complying the provisions of Section 147 to 151 opinion and without complying the provisions of Section 147 to 151 of the Act. 2. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs. e addition of Rs. 1,35,00,000/ 1,35,00,000/- being share application money received from six being share application money received from six companies though the source in respect of the same is legitimate. companies though the source in respect of the same is legitimate. companies though the source in respect of the same is legitimate.

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 b) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the b) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the b) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in not considering NFAC erred in not considering the fact that the appellant is not required to explain the source of the source in appellant is not required to explain the source of the source in appellant is not required to explain the source of the source in respect of share application money for A.Y. 2010 respect of share application money for A.Y. 2010-11. 11. c) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the c) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the c) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC ignored the details filed though the NFAC ignored the details filed though the appellant has proved the capacity, identity and genuineness of the has proved the capacity, identity and genuineness of the has proved the capacity, identity and genuineness of the transactions in respect of share application money. transactions in respect of share application money. transactions in respect of share application money. 3. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs. NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,00,000 under Section 68 of the Act without going into the det 15,00,000 under Section 68 of the Act without going into the det nder Section 68 of the Act without going into the details and the total additions in and the total additions in respect of unsecured loan was confirmed respect of unsecured loan was confirmed by way of surmise and conjecture. by way of surmise and conjecture. b) The CIT(A) b) The CIT(A)-NFAC erred in not considering the detailed NFAC erred in not considering the detailed submissions filed though the same was i submissions filed though the same was incorporated in the CIT(A)'s ncorporated in the CIT(A)'s order. c) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law. the c) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law. the c) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law. the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC ignored the details filed though the appellant NFAC ignored the details filed though the appellant has proved the capacity, identity and genuineness of the has proved the capacity, identity and genuineness of the has proved the capacity, identity and genuineness of the transactions with the lender. transactions with the lender.

S. No. Name Name Amount (Rs.) 1 M/s. Casper Enterprises M/s. Casper Enterprises 40,00,000 2 M/s. Kush Hindustan Ent. Ltd M/s. Kush Hindustan Ent. Ltd 19,00,000 3 M/s. Nakshatra Business Pvt. Ltd M/s. Nakshatra Business Pvt. Ltd 19,00,000 4 M/s. Olive Overseas Pvt. Ltd M/s. Olive Overseas Pvt. Ltd 19,00,000 5 M/s. Raghunandan Rayons Ltd M/s. Raghunandan Rayons Ltd 19,00,000 6 Triangular Infocom Ltd. Triangular Infocom Ltd. 19,00,000 7 Triangular Infocom Ltd. Triangular Infocom Ltd. 15,00,000 Total Total 1,50,00,000 11.1 The assessee furnished confirmations, copies of income The assessee furnished confirmations, copies of income The assessee furnished confirmations, copies of income-tax returns, bank statements, ledger accounts, and other supporting returns, bank statements, ledger accounts, and other supporting returns, bank statements, ledger accounts, and other supporting documents in respect of the said receipts. However, the Assessing documents in respect of the said receipts. However, the Assessing documents in respect of the said receipts. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied and concluded that the said entities were Officer was not satisfied and concluded that the said entities were Officer was not satisfied and concluded that the said entities were not carrying on any genuine business activity and were part of not carrying on any genuine business activity and were part of not carrying on any genuine business activity and were part of the accommodation entry network operated by the Shri Praveen the accommodation entry network operated by the Shri Praveen the accommodation entry network operated by the Shri Praveen Kumar Jain Group. Relying primarily on the findings of the Kumar Jain Group. Relying primarily on the findings of the Kumar Jain Group. Relying primarily on the findings of the Investigation Wing and statements recorded during search Investigation Wing and statements recorded during search Investigation Wing and statements recorded during search proceedings, the Assessing Officer treated the entire sum of e Assessing Officer treated the entire sum of e Assessing Officer treated the entire sum of Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 ₹1,50,00,000/– as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act.

“7.2. As per the details placed on record, prima facie it would appear 7.2. As per the details placed on record, prima facie it would appear 7.2. As per the details placed on record, prima facie it would appear that the appellant introduced unaccounted income in the guise of that the appellant introduced unaccounted income in the guise of that the appellant introduced unaccounted income in the guise of share applicat share application money and unsecured loans by availing secured loans by availing accommodation entries from the entities operated by Shri Pravin accommodation entries from the entities operated by Shri Pravin accommodation entries from the entities operated by Shri Pravin Kumar Jain. This particular modus operandi was unearthed by the Kumar Jain. This particular modus operandi was unearthed by the Kumar Jain. This particular modus operandi was unearthed by the Income Tax Department in plethora of cases throughout India more Income Tax Department in plethora of cases throughout India more Income Tax Department in plethora of cases throughout India more so the companies oper so the companies operated by Shri Pravin Kumar Jain, Mumbai. ated by Shri Pravin Kumar Jain, Mumbai. Coming to the facts of the instant case, the appellant ought to Coming to the facts of the instant case, the appellant ought to Coming to the facts of the instant case, the appellant ought to have discharged have discharged have discharged the burden of proof by establishing the burden of proof by establishing the burden of proof by establishing the the the genuineness of unsecured loans in from whom the share application genuineness of unsecured loans in from whom the share application genuineness of unsecured loans in from whom the share application money and unsecured loans money and unsecured loans were received obtained to the extent of were received obtained to the extent of Rs.1,50,00,000/ Rs.1,50,00,000/- from the following six accommodation providing from the following six accommodation providing entities. They are given below: They are given below: S. No. Name Name Amount (Rs.) 1 M/s. M/s. Casper Casper Enterprises Enterprises (share (share 40,00,000 application money) application money) 2 M/s. Kush Hindustan Ent. Ltd (share M/s. Kush Hindustan Ent. Ltd 19,00,000 application money) application money) 3 M/s. Nakshatra Business Pvt. Ltd (share M/s. Nakshatra Business Pvt. Ltd (share 19,00,000 application money) application money) 4 M/s. Olive Overseas Pvt. Ltd(share M/s. Olive Overseas Pvt. Ltd(share 19,00,000 application money) application money) 5 M/s. Raghunandan Rayons Ltd (share M/s. Raghunandan Rayons Ltd (share 19,00,000 application money) application money) 6 Triangular Triangular Infocom Ltd. (share 19,00,000 application money) application money) 7 Triangular Infocom Ltd. (unsecured loan) Triangular Infocom Ltd. (unsecured loan) 15,00,000 Total Total 1,50,00,000

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd No. 5371 to 5375/MUM/2025 Under the circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the Under the circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the Under the circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the unsecured loans of Rs. 1,50,00,000/ unsecured loans of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- introduced in the books of introduced in the books of accounts by of share application money through accommodation accounts by of share application money through accommodation accounts by of share application money through accommodation entry providers has not established as genuine or accounted entry providers has not established as genuine or accounted entry providers has not established as genuine or accounted funds/income of the persons in whose name it is credited in the funds/income of the persons in whose name it is credited in the funds/income of the persons in whose name it is credited in the books of the appellant within the meaning of section 68 of the Act. In books of the appellant within the meaning of section 68 of the Act. In books of the appellant within the meaning of section 68 of the Act. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, "SMC" this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, "SMC" this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, "SMC" Bench, Mumbai in the case of J K Global, Mumbai vs Income Tax Bench, Mumbai in the case of J K Global, Mumbai vs Income Tax Bench, Mumbai in the case of J K Global, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer 31(2)(2), Mumbai the Hon'ble ITAT that has held that the Officer 31(2)(2), Mumbai the Hon'ble ITAT that has held that the Officer 31(2)(2), Mumbai the Hon'ble ITAT that has held that the accommodation entries in the nature of accommodation entries are accommodation entries in the nature of accommodation entrie accommodation entries in the nature of accommodation entrie liable to be added as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act. The operative liable to be added as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act. The operative liable to be added as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act. The operative portion of the decision is reproduced here under: portion of the decision is reproduced here under: "7. Considering the facts of the case in toto and in the "7. Considering the facts of the case in toto and in the "7. Considering the facts of the case in toto and in the light of the decisions of the coordinate bench (supra), we light of the decisions of the coordinate bench (supra), we light of the decisions of the coordinate bench (supra), we have no hesitati have no hesitation in confirming the addition made u/s on in confirming the addition made u/s 68 of the Act for the captioned Assessment years. The 68 of the Act for the captioned Assessment years. The 68 of the Act for the captioned Assessment years. The contention of the Id. counsel that the loans have been re contention of the Id. counsel that the loans have been re contention of the Id. counsel that the loans have been re- paid during the year under consideration therefore the paid during the year under consideration therefore the paid during the year under consideration therefore the set off of the same should also be set off of the same should also be given to the as given to the assessee does not hold any water as it has been established that does not hold any water as it has been established that does not hold any water as it has been established that the impugned loans were nothing but accommodation the impugned loans were nothing but accommodation the impugned loans were nothing but accommodation entries and the repayment is also nothing but return of entries and the repayment is also nothing but return of entries and the repayment is also nothing but return of accommodation entries therefore, the money which has accommodation entries therefore, the money which has accommodation entries therefore, the money which has been brought 325 been brought 3259 & 3258/Mum/2023 9 & 3258/Mum/2023 J. K. Global in the garb of unsecured loan is nothing but J. K. Global in the garb of unsecured loan is nothing but J. K. Global in the garb of unsecured loan is nothing but the unaccounted money of the assessee and the the unaccounted money of the assessee and the the unaccounted money of the assessee and the repayment of the same does not make any sense. repayment of the same does not make any sense. repayment of the same does not make any sense.

8. In the light of the decision of the coordinate bench the 8. In the light of the decision of the coordinate bench the 8. In the light of the decision of the coordinate bench the additions are confirmed fo additions are confirmed for all the assessment years r all the assessment years under consideration since the loan amount has been under consideration since the loan amount has been under consideration since the loan amount has been treated as unaccounted money of the assessee for treated as unaccounted money of the assessee for treated as unaccounted money of the assessee for payment of interest of such loan amount claimed as payment of interest of such loan amount claimed as payment of interest of such loan amount claimed as unexplained and added by the AO is also confirmed." unexplained and added by the AO is also confirmed." unexplained and added by the AO is also confirmed." In view of aforementioned In view of aforementioned factual matrix of the case and respectfully factual matrix of the case and respectfully following the decision of hon'ble TAT, Mumbai, I am of the following the decision of hon'ble TAT, Mumbai, I am of the following the decision of hon'ble TAT, Mumbai, I am of the considered opinion that in the instant case, the appellant failed to considered opinion that in the instant case, the appellant failed to considered opinion that in the instant case, the appellant failed to establish the genuineness of the share application money and establish the genuineness of the share application money and establish the genuineness of the share application money and unsecured loan to the unsecured loan to the extent of Rs.1,50,00,000/- and therefore the and therefore the addition made by the AO is treating the same as unexplained cash addition made by the AO is treating the same as unexplained cash addition made by the AO is treating the same as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act is upheld. The appellant relied on numerous credit u/s 68 of the Act is upheld. The appellant relied on numerous credit u/s 68 of the Act is upheld. The appellant relied on numerous