"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No. 6458/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 A One Sizing Works, House No. 1237, Opp. Ganesh Compound, Behind Mahakali Dyeing Narpoli, Bhiwandi-421302. Vs. The Asst. CIT Central Circle 3, 12, A Wing, Ashar IT Park, 6th floor, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane West-400604. PAN NO. AAJFA 6696 F Appellant Respondent IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-2020 A One Sizing Works, House No. 1237, Opp. Ganesh Compound, Behind Mahakali Dyeing Narpoli, Bhiwandi-421302. Vs. The Asst. CIT Central Circle 3, 12, A Wing, Ashar IT Park, 6th floor, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane West-400604. PAN NO. AAJFA 6696 F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Simran Dhawan Revenue by : Mr. Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 16/06/2025 Date of pronouncement : 10/07/2025 PER Bench These appeals by the assessee to 2019-20 respectively 29.11.2024 passed by the Ld. (Appeals) – 11, Pune [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] assessments framed under Section 153A of the Income 1961 (hereinafter referred to as seizure operation conducted on the Act. 2. As common issue and therefore, same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. Briefly stated, facts of the action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 27.11.20 premises of “Dodhia” with other concern/business associates. search, various documents w individuals were recorded. One such individual was Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, who, in his statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act, was confronted with questions regarding the genuineness of unsecured loans/share ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 ORDER These appeals by the assessee for assessment years 2014 20 respectively are directed against a common order dated 29.11.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income 11, Pune [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] assessments framed under Section 153A of the Income 1961 (hereinafter referred to as \"the Act\") pursuant to a search and seizure operation conducted on 27.11.2019 under Section 132 of As common issues-in-dispute are involved in these appeals and therefore, same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 27.11.20 premises of “Dodhia” Group of cases including the assessee along with other concern/business associates. During the course of the search, various documents were seized, and statements were recorded. One such individual was Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, who, in his statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act, was confronted with questions regarding the genuineness of unsecured loans/share application money received from several A One Sizing Works 2 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 for assessment years 2014-15 are directed against a common order dated Commissioner of Income-tax arising out of assessments framed under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, ) pursuant to a search and 27.11.2019 under Section 132 of dispute are involved in these appeals and therefore, same were heard together and disposed off by way of case are that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 27.11.2019 at the Group of cases including the assessee along During the course of the ere seized, and statements of various were recorded. One such individual was Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, who, in his statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act, was confronted with questions regarding the genuineness of application money received from several Kolkata-based companies. Initially, he declined to comment or clarify the source or veracity of the transactions. Subsequently, on the basis of pages 36 to 38 of Bundle No. 3 seized from the residence of one Shri Div to Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, particularly in relation to the column titled “return” in seized document repayments after deduction of commission. Yet again, he declined to offer any explanation. certain accommodation entry operators admitted that the Dodhia Group had engaged in routing unaccounted cash into its books through entities such as Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. 3.1 In view of search action carried out at the premises of the assessee notices u/s 153A of the Act were issue years from 2014-15 to 2020 Act were accordingly completed on 28.09.2021, Assessing Officer made thereon in relevant assessment years. 3.2 In assessment year 2014 addition of Rs.55 lakhs u/s 68 of the Act for alleged accommodation entry of unsecured loan received from Commodities Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.15,00,000/ Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.20,00,000/ ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 based companies. Initially, he declined to comment or clarify the source or veracity of the transactions. Subsequently, on the basis of pages 36 to 38 of Bundle No. 3 seized from the residence of one Shri Divyesh Dhanani, further questions were put to Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, particularly in relation to the column in seized document indicating repayments after deduction of commission. Yet again, he declined to offer any explanation. It was only upon being shown statements of certain accommodation entry operators , Shri Bhadresh Dodhia admitted that the Dodhia Group had engaged in routing unaccounted cash into its books through entities such as Vinam search action carried out at the premises of the u/s 153A of the Act were issued 15 to 2020-21 and assessment u/s 153A of the were accordingly completed on 28.09.2021, Assessing Officer made additions for the various loans and interest relevant assessment years. In assessment year 2014-15, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.55 lakhs u/s 68 of the Act for alleged accommodation entry of unsecured loan received from three parties namely Commodities Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.15,00,000/-); (ii) Value Added Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.20,00,000/-); and (iii) Dolphin Commerce Pvt. Ltd. A One Sizing Works 3 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 based companies. Initially, he declined to comment or clarify the source or veracity of the transactions. Subsequently, on the basis of pages 36 to 38 of Bundle No. 3 seized from the yesh Dhanani, further questions were put to Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, particularly in relation to the column indicating probable cash repayments after deduction of commission. Yet again, he declined to It was only upon being shown statements of Shri Bhadresh Dodhia admitted that the Dodhia Group had engaged in routing unaccounted cash into its books through entities such as Vinam search action carried out at the premises of the for assessment u/s 153A of the were accordingly completed on 28.09.2021, wherein, the rious loans and interest 15, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.55 lakhs u/s 68 of the Act for alleged accommodation arties namely, (i) Mili Value Added Merchants Dolphin Commerce Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.20,00,000/-). Further, interest of Rs.17,18,794/ respect of these loans was also disall 3.3 In assessment year 2015 Rs.1,50,00,000/- from Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. was disallowed invoking section 68 of the Act. Further interest expenditure of Rs.17,84,744/- in respect of loans claimed by the assessee was disallowed. 3.4 In assessment year 2016 addition of Rs.1,95,00,000/ as accommodation entries from (i) Manyata Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.75,00,000/-), (ii) Safalta Vinimay Pvt. Lt (iii) Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.75,00,000/ also disallowed the interest of Rs.43,36,689/ assessee as revenue expenditure in respect of these unsecured loans. 3.5 In assessment year 2017 loan of Rs.50,00,000/ invoking section 68 of the Act and disallowed interest of Rs.46,67,717/- claimed in respect of unsecured loans. 3.6 In assessment year 2018 disallowance of Rs.34,03,144/ claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure holding the same paid towards bogus and unsecured loans. ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 ). Further, interest of Rs.17,18,794/ respect of these loans was also disallowed. In assessment year 2015-16 addition for unsecured loan of from Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. was disallowed invoking section 68 of the Act. Further interest expenditure of in respect of loans claimed by the assessee was In assessment year 2016-17, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1,95,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act for treating the loans entries from (i) Manyata Merchants Pvt. Ltd. ), (ii) Safalta Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.45,00,000/ Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.75,00,000/-). The Assessing Officer also disallowed the interest of Rs.43,36,689/- claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure in respect of these unsecured In assessment year 2017-18, the Assessing Officer disallowed loan of Rs.50,00,000/- received from Kirteshwari Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. invoking section 68 of the Act and disallowed interest of claimed in respect of unsecured loans. In assessment year 2018-19, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs.34,03,144/- on account of interest which was claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure holding the same paid towards bogus and unsecured loans. A One Sizing Works 4 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 ). Further, interest of Rs.17,18,794/- paid in 16 addition for unsecured loan of from Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. was disallowed invoking section 68 of the Act. Further interest expenditure of in respect of loans claimed by the assessee was also 17, the Assessing Officer made u/s 68 of the Act for treating the loans entries from (i) Manyata Merchants Pvt. Ltd. d. (Rs.45,00,000/-) and ). The Assessing Officer claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure in respect of these unsecured , the Assessing Officer disallowed received from Kirteshwari Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. invoking section 68 of the Act and disallowed interest of claimed in respect of unsecured loans. ssing Officer made on account of interest which was claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure holding the same 3.7 Similarly, in assessment year 2019 Officer made disallowance of interest of Rs.30,90,985/ be paid in respect of bogus and unsecured loans. 4. In the grounds raised for various the assessee has raised one of the common legal incriminating material whatsoever was found during the course of search from its own premises relation to completed/unabated assessments are not sustainable in law. The relevant ground raised in AY 2014 reproduced as under: AY 2014-15: 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs.72,18,794/ incriminating material whatsoever found du & seizure action, pertaining to the year under AY 2015-16: 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under AY 2016-17 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. upholding the addition of Rs 2,25,18,835/ incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 Similarly, in assessment year 2019-2020 also the Assessing er made disallowance of interest of Rs.30,90,985/ be paid in respect of bogus and unsecured loans. In the grounds raised for various assessment years the assessee has raised one of the common legal grounds material whatsoever was found during the course of search from its own premises, and therefore, the additions made in relation to completed/unabated assessments are not sustainable in The relevant ground raised in AY 2014-15 to AY 2019 d as under: On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs.72,18,794/- in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under consideration On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs 1,67,84,744/- in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under consideration. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs 2,25,18,835/- in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under consideration. A One Sizing Works 5 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 2020 also the Assessing er made disallowance of interest of Rs.30,90,985/- holding to years before us, grounds that no material whatsoever was found during the course of and therefore, the additions made in relation to completed/unabated assessments are not sustainable in to AY 2019-20 is On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in in absence of any ring the course of search consideration On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search consideration. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search consideration. AY 2017-18 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs 89,01,817/ incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under AY 2018-19 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs 24,00,526/ incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under AY 2019-2020 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of upholding the addition of Rs 18,28,145/ incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under 4.1 We have heard rival submissions o issue in dispute as regards to the existence of incriminating material qua the assessment years 2014 whether any addition could be sustained in those assessment orders passed u/s 153A of the Act in absence material found and seized from the premises of the assessee. issue is no longer res integra. PCIT [(2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC)], the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in the case of unabated or can be made under Section 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs 89,01,817/- in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search seizure action, pertaining to the year under consideration. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs 24,00,526/- in absence incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under consideration On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs 18,28,145/- in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search & seizure action, pertaining to the year under consideration. We have heard rival submissions of the parties issue in dispute as regards to the existence of incriminating material qua the assessment years 2014-15 to AY 2018 whether any addition could be sustained in those assessment orders passed u/s 153A of the Act in absence of any incriminating material found and seized from the premises of the assessee. issue is no longer res integra. In Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. v. [(2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC)], the Hon’ble Supreme Court held in the case of unabated or completed assessments can be made under Section 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search. In case of abated A One Sizing Works 6 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search consideration. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search consideration On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and Income Tax (Appeals) erred in in absence of any incriminating material whatsoever found during the course of search consideration. f the parties on the specific issue in dispute as regards to the existence of incriminating 15 to AY 2018-19 and whether any addition could be sustained in those assessment of any incriminating material found and seized from the premises of the assessee. The Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. v. [(2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC)], the Hon’ble Supreme Court held completed assessments, no addition can be made under Section 153A of the Act in the absence of any In case of abated assessment years, the AO could make addition on the basis of any information or entry in th any on the basis of incriminating material. Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra) is reproduced as under: “14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: i) that in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A; ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; iii) in case any incriminating material is fou of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the ‘total income’ taking into consideration the incriminating material unearthed during the search and the other material available w the returns; and iv) in case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re AO in exercise of powers under fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 4.2 To ascertain the applicability of the ratio in (supra), it is necessary to determine whether the assessments for ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 assessment years, the AO could make addition on the basis of any information or entry in the return of income along with addition if any on the basis of incriminating material. The relevant finding of Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra) is reproduced as under: 14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: at in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the ‘total income’ taking into consideration the incriminating material unearthed during the search and the other material available with the AO including the income declared in in case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under of the Act and those powers are saved.” (emphasis supplied externally) To ascertain the applicability of the ratio in Abhisar Buildwell , it is necessary to determine whether the assessments for A One Sizing Works 7 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 assessment years, the AO could make addition on the basis of any e return of income along with addition if The relevant finding of Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra) is reproduced as under: 14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is at in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; nd/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the ‘total income’ taking into consideration the incriminating material unearthed during the search and ith the AO including the income declared in in case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed . Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections hasis supplied externally) Abhisar Buildwell , it is necessary to determine whether the assessments for each of the years in question were abated or not as on the date of search, i.e., 27.11.2019. It is not in dispute that the limitation for issuance of notice under Section 143(2) had already expired in respect of AYs 2014 were pending on the date of search. Therefore, assessments for those years stood completed and fall within the category of unabated assessments were within the limitation period for issuance of notice under Section 143(2), and hence are to be treated as 4.3 Accordingly, in the case of assessee abated or unabated for assessment years is summarised Assessment year Due date/date filing of Return 2014-15 31/10/2014 2015-16 31/10/2015 2016-17 31/10/2016 2017-18 31/10/2017 2018-19 31/10/2018 2019-20 31/10/2019 2020-21 (current year) 31/10/2020 4.4 There is no dispute between parties on the issue of particular assessment year as abated or unabated as summarised in above table. Therefore, the issue of whether there was any incriminating ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 each of the years in question were abated or not as on the date of search, i.e., 27.11.2019. It is not in dispute that the limitation for issuance of notice under Section 143(2) had already expired in respect of AYs 2014–15 to 2018–19, and no scrutiny proc were pending on the date of search. Therefore, assessments for those years stood completed and fall within the category of unabated assessments. Conversely, AYs 2019–20 and 2020 were within the limitation period for issuance of notice under ion 143(2), and hence are to be treated as abated in the case of assessee status of unabated for relevant current year and six preceding is summarised as under: /date of filing of Limitation for issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act Whether any scrutiny proceeding pending for the AY 31/10/2014 30/09/2015 No 31/10/2015 30/09/2016 No 31/10/2016 30/09/2017 No 31/10/2017 30/09/2018 No 31/10/2018 30/09/2019 No 31/10/2019 30/09/2020 No 31/10/2020 30/09/2021 No There is no dispute between parties on the issue of particular assessment year as abated or unabated as summarised in above Therefore, the issue of whether there was any incriminating A One Sizing Works 8 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 each of the years in question were abated or not as on the date of search, i.e., 27.11.2019. It is not in dispute that the limitation for issuance of notice under Section 143(2) had already expired in 19, and no scrutiny proceedings were pending on the date of search. Therefore, assessments for those years stood completed and fall within the category of 20 and 2020–21 were within the limitation period for issuance of notice under abated assessments. of assessment as relevant current year and six preceding Abated/unabated unabated unabated unabated unabated unabated Abated Abated There is no dispute between parties on the issue of particular assessment year as abated or unabated as summarised in above Therefore, the issue of whether there was any incriminating material found from the premises of the assessee in respect of assessment years 2014 years , is to be examined in the case of the assessee for complying with the ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 4.6 We note that i Officer in the assessment order has issued show case notice which is available on page 3 to 4 of the assessment order reference, which is reproduced as under: “You have been provided with several opportunities by this make submissions/explanations in your case. But it is seen that you have not made any submissions in response to the notices issued till date. Hence one final/last opportunity is being presented to you vide this showcause notice to make submissi It is seen that for the year under consideration, you have taken unsecured loans from the following companies as mentioned below: FY Loan Taken By 2013^14 A One Sizing 2013-14 A One Sizing Works 2013-14 A One Sizing Works 2014-15 A One Sizing Works 2015-16 A One Sizing Works 2015-16 A One Sizing Works 2015-16 A One Sizing Works 2016-17 A One Sizing Works As per the enquiries conducted by the department established that the above mentioned companies from which you have taken unsecured loans are bogus. Hence one more opportunity is being given to you to present the directors of the above mentioned ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 material found from the premises of the assessee in respect of 2014-15 to 2018-19 i.e. unabated assessment is to be examined in the case of the assessee for complying with the ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (supra). We note that in assessment year 2014-15, the Assessing Officer in the assessment order has issued show case notice which is available on page 3 to 4 of the assessment order reference, which is reproduced as under: You have been provided with several opportunities by this make submissions/explanations in your case. But it is seen that you have not made any submissions in response to the notices issued till date. Hence one final/last opportunity is being presented to you vide this showcause notice to make submissions/explanations. It is seen that for the year under consideration, you have taken unsecured loans from the following companies as mentioned below: Loan Taken By Loan Taken From Amount of Loan received (Rs) Amount of interest (Rs) A One Sizing Works Dolphin Commerce P. Ltd 20,00,000 86,137 A One Sizing Works Mili Commodities P. Limited 15,00,000 7,06,685 A One Sizing Works Value Added Merchants P. Limited 20,00,000 1,59,123 A One Sizing Works Vinam Finance P. Limited 1,50,00,000 65,950 A One Sizing Works Manyata Merchants P. Limited 75,00,000 6,35,506 A One Sizing Works Safalta Vinimay P. Limited 45,00,000 3,15,124 A One Sizing Vinam Finance P. Limited 75,00,000 16,01,315 Sizing Works KirteshwariVintrade P. Limited 50,00,000 3,31,028 Total4,50,00,000 39,00,868 As per the enquiries conducted by the department, it has been established that the above mentioned companies from which you have taken unsecured loans are bogus. Hence one more opportunity is being given to you to present the directors of the above mentioned A One Sizing Works 9 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 material found from the premises of the assessee in respect of i.e. unabated assessment is to be examined in the case of the assessee for complying with the ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar 15, the Assessing Officer in the assessment order has issued show case notice which is available on page 3 to 4 of the assessment order, for ready You have been provided with several opportunities by this office to make submissions/explanations in your case. But it is seen that you have not made any submissions in response to the notices issued till date. Hence one final/last opportunity is being presented to you vide It is seen that for the year under consideration, you have taken unsecured loans from the following companies as mentioned below: Amount of interest (Rs) 86,137 7,06,685 1,59,123 65,950 6,35,506 3,15,124 16,01,315 3,31,028 39,00,868 , it has been established that the above mentioned companies from which you have taken unsecured loans are bogus. Hence one more opportunity is being given to you to present the directors of the above mentioned companies in the undersigned office for cross 20/09/2021 at 11:30 alongwith documentary evidences. On account of failure to present the directors of the above mentioned companies before the undersigned on or before 20/09/2021, you are showcaused as to why the unsecured loans amounting 4,50,00,000/- should not be treated as unexplained credit and added in your income and the interest paid thereon of Rs.39,00,868/ disallowed. As per the loose paper/documents (Bund during the course of search action u/s 132 on 27/11/2019 from the residence of Shri Harakchand M Dodhia, transaction amounting to Rs 1,27,000/ M Dodhia has explained that the details are of 1,27,000/-. In this connection you were requested to submit whether the expenses of Rs 1,27,000/ accounts with documentary evidences in support. Till date no submissions in this regard has been received fr Therefore, in view of the above, you are hereby required to showcause as to why the expenses amounting to Rs 1,27,000/ treated as unexplained expenditure and added to your income. If you fail to make submissions/ explanations in re showcause notice, it will be presumed that you have nothing to say in the matter and you accept proposed additions as stated above vide this show cause notice and assessment will be completed on the basis of material available 4.7 In above show cause notice, to two sources for proposing addition of unsecured loan inquiry conducted by the Department for considering the unsecured loans as unexplained cash credit (Bundle No. 1, page 8) seized during the course of search action u/s 132 from the residence (West) for transaction amounting to Rs.1,27,000/ assessment year 2020 referred to question No. 60 of the statement of Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, wherein he was question the Bundle No. 3 found during the course of search action at the ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 companies in the undersigned office for cross verification on 20/09/2021 at 11:30 alongwith documentary evidences. On account of failure to present the directors of the above mentioned companies before the undersigned on or before 20/09/2021, you are showcaused as to why the unsecured loans amounting taken from the above mentioned companies anies should not be treated as unexplained credit and added in your income and the interest paid thereon of Rs.39,00,868/-by you, should not be As per the loose paper/documents (Bundle No-1, page during the course of search action u/s 132 on 27/11/2019 from the residence of Shri Harakchand M Dodhia, Mulund (W), a transaction amounting to Rs 1,27,000/- is noticed. Shri Harakchand M Dodhia has explained that the details are of expenses of Rs . In this connection you were requested to submit whether the expenses of Rs 1,27,000/- has been recorded in the books of accounts with documentary evidences in support. Till date no submissions in this regard has been received from your end. Therefore, in view of the above, you are hereby required to showcause as to why the expenses amounting to Rs 1,27,000/- may not be treated as unexplained expenditure and added to your income. If you fail to make submissions/ explanations in response to this showcause notice, it will be presumed that you have nothing to say in the matter and you accept proposed additions as stated above vide this show cause notice and assessment will be completed on the basis of material available on record.\" In above show cause notice, the Assessing Officer has referred proposing addition of unsecured loan inquiry conducted by the Department for considering the unsecured oans as unexplained cash credit, secondly, loose paper (Bundle No. 1, page 8) seized during the course of search action u/s residence of Shri Harakchand M Dodhia, Mulund (West) for transaction amounting to Rs.1,27,000/- i.e. pertain assessment year 2020-21. Thirdly, the Assessing question No. 60 of the statement of Shri Bhadresh wherein he was questioned regarding page No. 36 to 38 of the Bundle No. 3 found during the course of search action at the A One Sizing Works 10 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 verification on 20/09/2021 at 11:30 alongwith documentary evidences. On account of failure to present the directors of the above mentioned companies before the undersigned on or before 20/09/2021, you are showcaused as to why the unsecured loans amounting to Rs taken from the above mentioned companies anies should not be treated as unexplained credit and added in your income by you, should not be 1, page-8) seized during the course of search action u/s 132 on 27/11/2019 from Mulund (W), a is noticed. Shri Harakchand expenses of Rs . In this connection you were requested to submit whether has been recorded in the books of accounts with documentary evidences in support. Till date no om your end. Therefore, in view of the above, you are hereby required to showcause may not be treated as unexplained expenditure and added to your income. sponse to this showcause notice, it will be presumed that you have nothing to say in the matter and you accept proposed additions as stated above vide this show cause notice and assessment will be completed on the basis the Assessing Officer has referred proposing addition of unsecured loan, firstly, the inquiry conducted by the Department for considering the unsecured loose paper/document (Bundle No. 1, page 8) seized during the course of search action u/s of Shri Harakchand M Dodhia, Mulund i.e. pertaining to the Assessing officer also question No. 60 of the statement of Shri Bhadresh regarding page No. 36 to 38 of the Bundle No. 3 found during the course of search action at the residence of Shri Divyesh Dhanani. In the said asked regarding the column “return” return of cash after deducting the commission of 3%. The relevant question and answer is reproduced as under: Q.60 I am showing you page no. 36 to 38 of the Bundle no.3 found and seized during the course of search action at the residence of Shri Divyesh Dhanani. These pages contain the details of loans from some of the Kolkata based companies mentioned above. As per these pages it is clear that Interest paid in cheque has been received back (mentioned under column \"return\")in cash after deducting the commission of 3%. Hence, it shows that, loans from these companies are accommodation entries taken in the books of Dodhia group. Ans. Cash is not mentioned in these pages. I am not able to explain the column \"return\" as of now. will go through the books and verify the same and 4.8 In addition to the above sources, in AY statement of sh Sushil Goyal provided by the investigation wing and statements of Shri Jakharia and sh Minesh Dhodia i.e Directors of Vinam Finance p ltd have been referred. commission was issued to of the unsecured loan parties and report obtained has also been referred by the Assessing Officer in assessment. 4.9 In the light of above sources for making addition, the assessee agitated the issue before t material was found from the premises of the assessee qua the AY 2014-15 to AY 2018- ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 residence of Shri Divyesh Dhanani. In the said ques regarding the column “return” in loose paper alleging return of cash after deducting the commission of 3%. The relevant question and answer is reproduced as under: Q.60 I am showing you page no. 36 to 38 of the Bundle no.3 found d seized during the course of search action at the residence of Shri Divyesh Dhanani. These pages contain the details of loans from some of the Kolkata based companies mentioned above. As per these pages it is clear that Interest paid in cheque has been ceived back (mentioned under column \"return\")in cash after deducting the commission of 3%. Hence, it shows that, loans from these companies are accommodation entries taken in the books of Dodhia group. Cash is not mentioned in these pages. I am not able to explain the column \"return\" as of now. will go through the books and verify the same and submit a reply. In addition to the above sources, in AY 2015-16 statement of sh Sushil Goyal , a Kolkata based entry operator provided by the investigation wing and statements of Shri Minesh Dhodia i.e Directors of Vinam Finance p ltd have been referred. In AY 2017-18 in post search investigation commission was issued to Investigation wing Kolkata for verification of the unsecured loan parties and report obtained has also been referred by the Assessing Officer in assessment. In the light of above sources for making addition, the assessee agitated the issue before the Ld. CIT(A) that no incriminating material was found from the premises of the assessee qua the AY -19 , but the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of A One Sizing Works 11 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 question, he was paper alleging to be return of cash after deducting the commission of 3%. The relevant Q.60 I am showing you page no. 36 to 38 of the Bundle no.3 found d seized during the course of search action at the residence of Shri Divyesh Dhanani. These pages contain the details of loans from some of the Kolkata based companies mentioned above. As per these pages it is clear that Interest paid in cheque has been ceived back (mentioned under column \"return\")in cash after deducting the commission of 3%. Hence, it shows that, loans from these companies are accommodation entries taken in the books of Cash is not mentioned in these pages. I am not able to explain the column \"return\" as of now. will go through the books 16 to 2016-17, , , a Kolkata based entry operator provided by the investigation wing and statements of Shri Bhavik Minesh Dhodia i.e Directors of Vinam Finance p 18 in post search investigation, Investigation wing Kolkata for verification of the unsecured loan parties and report obtained has also been In the light of above sources for making addition, the assessee that no incriminating material was found from the premises of the assessee qua the AYs but the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of the assessee. The relevant finding reproduced as under: “42. For the year under consideration, the appellant had raised a technical ground (ground no. 3) that no addition could have been made by the AO in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search operation. In this regard, no separate sub the appellate proceedings indicating that the appellant does not want to press this ground. In any case, as discussed while adjudicating the appeal for AY 2013 pages (page no. 37 and 38 the premises of Shri Divyesh Dhanani) were seized. These documents have details of various loans raised and interest paid by entities of Dodhia Group including the appellant. As per these seized pages, the amount of inte back by the group entities, after deducting a commission of 3% and the figure of arnount, received back from the loan creditors is mentioned under the column 'return'. The name of the assessee is also appearing at seized page no. 37 of M/s. Dolphin Commerce Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Value Added Merchants Pvt. Ltd is mentioned on this page, along with the details of amount received back. The said page was confronted with Shri Bhadresh Dhodia in the statement recorded during the search in question no. 60 of the statement and he could not explain the same. Furthermore, it is seen from the statement of Shri Bhadresh Dhodia that documents relating to loans taken from various shell companies by the group entities were found during the search and the same were confronted with Shri Bhadresh Dhodia and he could not give satisfactory explanation. Furthermore, he admitted in reply to question no. 70 and 72 that the cash available with the Dhodia Group was routed in the form of accommodation Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. In this background, during the post search investigation, the DDIT (Inv.) got conducted independent investigation regarding the existence of various loan creditors of Dhodia Group These enquiries were conducted well as Mumbai and these enquiries suggested that the so called loan creditors were not existing on the given addresses. 43. The above discussion clearly suggests that incriminating material regarding the accommodation entries was found durin the search as well as collected during the post search enquiries and therefore the contention of the appellant that no incriminating material was found during the search is incorrect. ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 . The relevant finding of ld CIT(A) in AY 2014 as under: 42. For the year under consideration, the appellant had raised a technical ground (ground no. 3) that no addition could have been made by the AO in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search operation. In this regard, no separate submission has been made by the appellant during the appellate proceedings indicating that the appellant does not want to press this ground. In any case, as discussed while adjudicating the appeal for AY 2013-14, it is seer that two pages (page no. 37 and 38 of bundle no: 3/Party no. MN5, from the premises of Shri Divyesh Dhanani) were seized. These documents have details of various loans raised and interest paid by entities of Dodhia Group including the appellant. As per these seized pages, the amount of interest paid was received back by the group entities, after deducting a commission of 3% and the figure of arnount, received back from the loan creditors is mentioned under the column 'return'. The name of the assessee is also appearing at seized page no. 37 and the name of M/s. Dolphin Commerce Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Value Added Merchants Pvt. Ltd is mentioned on this page, along with the details of amount received back. The said page was confronted with Shri Bhadresh Dhodia in the statement recorded during earch in question no. 60 of the statement and he could not explain the same. Furthermore, it is seen from the statement of Shri Bhadresh Dhodia that documents relating to loans taken from various shell companies by the group entities were found search and the same were confronted with Shri Bhadresh Dhodia and he could not give satisfactory explanation. Furthermore, he admitted in reply to question no. 70 and 72 that the cash available with the Dhodia Group was routed in the form of accommodation entries through M/s. Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. In this background, during the post search investigation, the DDIT (Inv.) got conducted independent investigation regarding the existence of various loan creditors of Dhodia Group These enquiries were conducted at Kolkata as well as Mumbai and these enquiries suggested that the so called loan creditors were not existing on the given addresses. 43. The above discussion clearly suggests that incriminating material regarding the accommodation entries was found durin the search as well as collected during the post search enquiries and therefore the contention of the appellant that no incriminating material was found during the search is incorrect. A One Sizing Works 12 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 in AY 2014-15 is 42. For the year under consideration, the appellant had raised a technical ground (ground no. 3) that no addition could have been made by the AO in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search operation. In this regard, no mission has been made by the appellant during the appellate proceedings indicating that the appellant does not want to press this ground. In any case, as discussed while 14, it is seer that two of bundle no: 3/Party no. MN5, from the premises of Shri Divyesh Dhanani) were seized. These documents have details of various loans raised and interest paid by entities of Dodhia Group including the appellant. As per rest paid was received back by the group entities, after deducting a commission of 3% and the figure of arnount, received back from the loan creditors is mentioned under the column 'return'. The name of the and the name of M/s. Dolphin Commerce Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Value Added Merchants Pvt. Ltd is mentioned on this page, along with the details of amount received back. The said page was confronted with Shri Bhadresh Dhodia in the statement recorded during earch in question no. 60 of the statement and he could not explain the same. Furthermore, it is seen from the statement of Shri Bhadresh Dhodia that documents relating to loans taken from various shell companies by the group entities were found search and the same were confronted with Shri Bhadresh Dhodia and he could not give satisfactory explanation. Furthermore, he admitted in reply to question no. 70 and 72 that the cash available with the Dhodia Group was entries through M/s. Vinam Finance Pvt. Ltd. In this background, during the post search investigation, the DDIT (Inv.) got conducted independent investigation regarding the existence of various loan creditors of at Kolkata as well as Mumbai and these enquiries suggested that the so- called loan creditors were not existing on the given addresses. 43. The above discussion clearly suggests that incriminating material regarding the accommodation entries was found during the search as well as collected during the post search enquiries and therefore the contention of the appellant that no incriminating material was found during the search is incorrect. Accordingly, the ground no. 3 raised by the appellant is 4.10 Upon careful scrutiny of the assessment orders and material relied upon by the Revenue, it is evident that the documents and statements relied upon by the Assessing Officer (AO) were either:  Seized from third party premises Divyesh Dhanani); or  Statements of third parties search; or  Post-search investigation reports Investigation Wing. 4.11 We find that the Assessing Officer has no where referred to any of the incriminat assessee in respect of AYs 2014 show cause notices themselves refer to seized materials from other premises and persons. The materials relied upon 36–38 of Bundle No. 3 party and not from the assessee. Therefore, such documents, in the absence of invocation of Section 153C of the Act, to make additions in the hands of the assessee As far as statements of Shri Bhadresh Dodhia and other are concerned, not a single statement has been recorded from the premises of the assessee and therefore, same cannot be treated as incriminating material seized or found from the premises of the ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 Accordingly, the ground no. 3 raised by the DISMISSED.” Upon careful scrutiny of the assessment orders and material relied upon by the Revenue, it is evident that the documents and statements relied upon by the Assessing Officer (AO) were either: third party premises (such as residence of Shri ivyesh Dhanani); or Statements of third parties recorded during search or post search investigation reports obtained from the Kolkata Investigation Wing. We find that the Assessing Officer has no where referred to any of the incriminating material found from the premises of the in respect of AYs 2014–15 to 2018–19. In fact, the AO’s show cause notices themselves refer to seized materials from other premises and persons. The materials relied upon — 38 of Bundle No. 3 — were found from the residence of a third rty and not from the assessee. Therefore, such documents, in the absence of invocation of Section 153C of the Act, cannot be utilized to make additions in the hands of the assessee under Section 153A. As far as statements of Shri Bhadresh Dodhia and other are concerned, not a single statement has been recorded from the premises of the assessee and therefore, same cannot be treated as incriminating material seized or found from the premises of the A One Sizing Works 13 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 Accordingly, the ground no. 3 raised by the Upon careful scrutiny of the assessment orders and material relied upon by the Revenue, it is evident that the documents and statements relied upon by the Assessing Officer (AO) were either: (such as residence of Shri recorded during search or post- obtained from the Kolkata We find that the Assessing Officer has no where referred to ing material found from the premises of the 19. In fact, the AO’s show cause notices themselves refer to seized materials from other including pages were found from the residence of a third rty and not from the assessee. Therefore, such documents, in the cannot be utilized under Section 153A. As far as statements of Shri Bhadresh Dodhia and other persons are concerned, not a single statement has been recorded from the premises of the assessee and therefore, same cannot be treated as incriminating material seized or found from the premises of the assessee. We also found that Hon’ble Delhi High Court of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263 statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act do not constitute incriminating material found from the premises of the assessee. Further, even the Ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order admit pages 37 and 38 of Bundle No. 3 were seized from a third party and confronted to Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, who could not explain the same. However, such confrontation cannot substitute for the statutory requirement that from the premises of the assessee sustain additions in unabated assessments. 4.12 In view of the above analysis, we hold that:  For the unabated assessment years 2018–19, no addition could have been 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search from the premises of the assessee.  Statements of third parties, or material found from other premises, not being relatable to the assessee's p cannot form the basis for additions in a 153A proceeding in respect of completed assessments, unless proceedings under other provisions done in this case. ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 assessee. We also found that Hon’ble Delhi High Court CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263 statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act do not constitute incriminating material found from the premises of the assessee. Further, even the Ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order admit pages 37 and 38 of Bundle No. 3 were seized from a third party and confronted to Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, who could not explain the same. However, such confrontation cannot substitute for the statutory requirement that incriminating material must be from the premises of the assessee, not third parties, in order to sustain additions in unabated assessments. In view of the above analysis, we hold that: unabated assessment years viz. AYs , no addition could have been made under Section 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search from the premises of the Statements of third parties, or material found from other premises, not being relatable to the assessee's p cannot form the basis for additions in a 153A proceeding in respect of completed assessments, unless proceedings under other provisions are separately initiated — which has not been done in this case. A One Sizing Works 14 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 assessee. We also found that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263 held that statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act do not constitute incriminating material found from the premises of the assessee. Further, even the Ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order admitted that pages 37 and 38 of Bundle No. 3 were seized from a third party and confronted to Shri Bhadresh Dodhia, who could not explain the same. However, such confrontation cannot substitute for the incriminating material must be found not third parties, in order to viz. AYs 2014–15 to made under Section 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search from the premises of the Statements of third parties, or material found from other premises, not being relatable to the assessee's premises, cannot form the basis for additions in a 153A proceeding in respect of completed assessments, unless proceedings under which has not been  Consequently, all additions made in respect of loans and disallowances of interest years are unsustainable in law 4.13 For the reasons stated above and in view of the settled position of law laid down by this Court in of the considered opinion that the additions made in assessment years 2014–15 to 2018 without jurisdiction and liable to be deleted. ground of appeals related to existence of incriminat raised in AYs 2014-15 to AY 2018 held that in absence of incriminating material, no addition could have been made in the case of the assessee from AYs 2014 2018-19 therefore, all other ground raised by t rendered academic and hence, we are not adjudicating upon the same. 5. As far as appeal for AY 2019 Officer has made addition in respect of interest related to the unsecured loans which have been held as cash credit by the AO in assessment year which we have already deleted and therefore, the addition of interest in respect of those unsecured loans also cannot surv Accordingly, the addition of interest 2019-2020 is also deleted. ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 Consequently, all additions made in respect of loans and disallowances of interest for the above assessment unsustainable in law. For the reasons stated above and in view of the settled position of law laid down by this Court in Abhisar Buildwell of the considered opinion that the additions made in assessment 15 to 2018–19 under Section 153A of the Act are without jurisdiction and liable to be deleted. Accordingly, the appeals related to existence of incriminat 15 to AY 2018-19 is allowed. Since we have held that in absence of incriminating material, no addition could have been made in the case of the assessee from AYs 2014 19 therefore, all other ground raised by the assessee are rendered academic and hence, we are not adjudicating upon the As far as appeal for AY 2019-2020 is concerned, the Assessing Officer has made addition in respect of interest related to the unsecured loans which have been held as bogus or unexplained cash credit by the AO in assessment years 2014- which we have already deleted and therefore, the addition of interest in respect of those unsecured loans also cannot surv Accordingly, the addition of interest made in assessment year also deleted. A One Sizing Works 15 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 Consequently, all additions made in respect of unsecured for the above assessment For the reasons stated above and in view of the settled position Abhisar Buildwell (supra), we are of the considered opinion that the additions made in assessment under Section 153A of the Act are Accordingly, the appeals related to existence of incriminating material 19 is allowed. Since we have held that in absence of incriminating material, no addition could have been made in the case of the assessee from AYs 2014-15 to AY he assessee are rendered academic and hence, we are not adjudicating upon the 2020 is concerned, the Assessing Officer has made addition in respect of interest related to the bogus or unexplained -15 to 2017-18, which we have already deleted and therefore, the addition of interest in respect of those unsecured loans also cannot survive. assessment years 6. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open Sd/ (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 10/07/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10 Sd/- Sd/ KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai A One Sizing Works 16 ITA No. 6458, & IT(SS)A. 6459, 6460, 6461, 6462 & 6463/MUM/2024 In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed. 10/07/2025. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai "