BHAVIKA RAVI SUKHIJA,MUMBAI V. ACIT (CENTRAL)-CIRCLE-2, MUMBAI

ITA 5220/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Bhavika Ravi Sukhija, the appellant, who contested additions made by the Assessing Officer under Sections 68 and 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, during the assessment year 2016-17. The additions were based on findings from a search operation on entities linked to Shri Ashish Begwani, which revealed a scheme of providing accommodation entries. The Assessing Officer treated a sum of Rs. 20,00,000 received by the appellant as an unexplained cash credit and added Rs. 60,000 as related commission expenditure. The appellant argued that the amount was a genuine advance for the sale of a property, not a loan or accommodation entry. The Tribunal has remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a detailed examination of the nature of the transaction and the involved entities.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 822523 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEYAQAT ALI AAFAQUI
• Assessee Lawyers: HARESH P. KHUNADIA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained expenditure; Document seized; Documents seized; Capital Gains; Search and seizure; Accommodation entries; Bogus
• Section: 132; 68; 131; 69C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhavika Ravi Sukhija, 1301/B, Runwal Elegante, Behind Infinity Mall, Lokhandwala Main Road, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053. Vs. ACIT Central Circle-2(2), Mumbai. PAN NO. AAMPN 1328 E Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Haresh P. Khunadia Revenue by : Mr. Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 17/12/2025 Date of pronouncement : 24/12/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 30.06.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – 48, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2016-17, raising following grounds: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A)-48, Mumbai erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash credits U/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without considering the fact that the appellant Printed from counselvise.com has already explained the source of the money with necessary evidences, without giving opportunity to cross examine the evidences relied upon and without considering the fact tha same has already been repaid subsequently. The same may please be deleted. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT (A) 60,000/-on account of unexplained expenditure U/s. I.T. Act, 1961 without considering the fact that the said amount is not received by the appellant. The same may please be deleted. 2. Briefly stated, the assessee filed her return of income on 30.09.2016 declaring a total income of the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 153C of tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\") . 2.1 The genesis of the proceedings lies in a search conducted u/s 132 of the Act on 22.10.2016 in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates. During the course of the search, it was unearthed that Shri Ashish Begwani and entities controlled or managed by him were engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries in the nature of unsecured loans, share capital and share premium, bogus long transactions and routing of unaccounted cash, inter alia, for gutkha manufacturers and other traders. Such entries were allegedly provided against receipt of unaccounted cash from the beneficiaries, on which commission was charged and retained in cash, thereby facilitating tax evasion by the beneficiaries as well as the entry operators. ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 has already explained the source of the money with necessary evidences, without giving opportunity to cross examine the evidences relied upon and without considering the fact tha same has already been repaid subsequently. The same may please be deleted. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT (A)- 48, Mumbai erred in making addition of Rs. on account of unexplained expenditure U/s. I.T. Act, 1961 without considering the fact that the said amount is not received by the appellant. The same may please be deleted. Briefly stated, the assessee filed her return of income on 30.09.2016 declaring a total income of ₹14,47,920/- the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 153C of tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\") . The genesis of the proceedings lies in a search conducted u/s 132 of the Act on 22.10.2016 in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani his associates. During the course of the search, it was unearthed that Shri Ashish Begwani and entities controlled or managed by him were engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries in the nature of unsecured loans, share premium, bogus long-term capital gains, hawala transactions and routing of unaccounted cash, inter alia, for gutkha manufacturers and other traders. Such entries were allegedly provided against receipt of unaccounted cash from the beneficiaries, ommission was charged and retained in cash, thereby facilitating tax evasion by the beneficiaries as well as the entry Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 2 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 has already explained the source of the money with necessary evidences, without giving opportunity to cross examine the evidences relied upon and without considering the fact that the same has already been repaid subsequently. The same may 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, 48, Mumbai erred in making addition of Rs. on account of unexplained expenditure U/s. 69C of the I.T. Act, 1961 without considering the fact that the said amount is not received by the appellant. The same may please be deleted. Briefly stated, the assessee filed her return of income on -. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Income- The genesis of the proceedings lies in a search conducted u/s 132 of the Act on 22.10.2016 in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani his associates. During the course of the search, it was unearthed that Shri Ashish Begwani and entities controlled or managed by him were engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries in the nature of unsecured loans, share term capital gains, hawala transactions and routing of unaccounted cash, inter alia, for gutkha manufacturers and other traders. Such entries were allegedly provided against receipt of unaccounted cash from the beneficiaries, ommission was charged and retained in cash, thereby facilitating tax evasion by the beneficiaries as well as the entry Printed from counselvise.com 2.2 During the search, certain digital material in the form of Excel spreadsheets was seized. The spreadsheets contained entries, including so date of receipt of cash, corresponding bank entries, names of the conduit companies controlled by the group, the beneficiaries, and the amounts involved. According to the A spreadsheets were prepared by Shri Nishant Chhajer at the instructions of Shri Ashish Begwani and other Kolkata operators Late Shri Gopal Das Aggarwal and Shri Vikas Aggarwal On being confronted with the excel sheet, S refused to give details of the sheets and claimed that he was unware of the contents of the documents. hand written rough noting from Shri Gopal typed out the sheets on the instructi he entered into draft excel format, at his office located at 941, 2 floor, Arjun Nagar Kotla Mubarakpur, Delhi. recorded during the search proceedings explained the alleged modus operandi of receipt of cash fro angadias and routing of equivalent amounts through banking channels in the guise of unsecured loans, with commission ordinarily charged at about three per cent. operandi of the transaction explained “The cash is received from the beneficiaries by some angadias on instructions of Shri Amit Chaudhary and in turn he provides he equivalent fund in respective bank accounts of beneficiaries in form of unsecured loans through non ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 During the search, certain digital material in the form of Excel spreadsheets was seized. The spreadsheets contained entries, including so-called \"OT\" and \"CCM\" entries, reflecting the date of receipt of cash, corresponding bank entries, names of the conduit companies controlled by the group, the beneficiaries, and the amounts involved. According to the Assessing Officer, these spreadsheets were prepared by Shri Nishant Chhajer at the instructions of Shri Ashish Begwani and other Kolkata Late Shri Gopal Das Aggarwal and Shri Vikas Aggarwal On being confronted with the excel sheet, Shri Nishant Chhajer refused to give details of the sheets and claimed that he was unware of the contents of the documents. But he stated that he received hand written rough noting from Shri Gopal Aggarwal and he simply typed out the sheets on the instructions of Ashish Begwani he entered into draft excel format, at his office located at 941, 2 floor, Arjun Nagar Kotla Mubarakpur, Delhi. The statements recorded during the search proceedings explained the alleged modus operandi of receipt of cash from beneficiaries through angadias and routing of equivalent amounts through banking channels in the guise of unsecured loans, with commission ordinarily charged at about three per cent. The brief modus operandi of the transaction explained by the AO is ext The cash is received from the beneficiaries by some angadias on instructions of Shri Amit Chaudhary and in turn he provides he equivalent fund in respective bank accounts of beneficiaries in form of unsecured loans through non-descript compa Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 3 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 During the search, certain digital material in the form of Excel spreadsheets was seized. The spreadsheets contained details of loan called \"OT\" and \"CCM\" entries, reflecting the date of receipt of cash, corresponding bank entries, names of the conduit companies controlled by the group, the beneficiaries, and ssessing Officer, these spreadsheets were prepared by Shri Nishant Chhajer at the instructions of Shri Ashish Begwani and other Kolkata-based entry Late Shri Gopal Das Aggarwal and Shri Vikas Aggarwal . hri Nishant Chhajer refused to give details of the sheets and claimed that he was unware stated that he received Aggarwal and he simply ons of Ashish Begwani, which he entered into draft excel format, at his office located at 941, 2nd The statements recorded during the search proceedings explained the alleged m beneficiaries through angadias and routing of equivalent amounts through banking channels in the guise of unsecured loans, with commission The brief modus by the AO is extracted below: The cash is received from the beneficiaries by some angadias on instructions of Shri Amit Chaudhary and in turn he provides he equivalent fund in respective bank accounts of beneficiaries in descript companies. I Printed from counselvise.com coordinate the process and subsequently commission generally @ 3% is received by JatinMadani inform of cash. Shri JatinMadani retain 0.3% of such commission and 0.3% is retained by me and remaining 2.4% is forwarded to Amit Chaudhary. The payment t Shri Amit Chaudhary was made through the angadias in Delhi on his directions. I do not have the residence details of Shri Amit Chaudhary. I have utilized the services of Shri NishantChhajer for providing me account of such accommodation entries/these transactions on ex 2.3 On examination of the seized material, the Assessing Officer noted that one of the Excel sheets contained an entry showing the assessee as a beneficiary of a sum of M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd., an the Ashish Begwani group. information contained therein the Ld. Assessing Officer following due procedure under the law issued notice u/s 153C of the Act on 21.12.2001 . In response, the a same income as returned originally. After issuing statutory notices and affording opportunity of hearing, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 153C, treating a sum of ₹20,00,000/- as unexplained Act, being in the nature of an accommodation entry. 3. On appeal, the learned Commissioner of Income upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. The appellate authority noted that the addition was founded o seized during the search, including the Excel sheets specifically naming the assessee as a beneficiary, and the statements recorded during the search explaining the systematic manner in which ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 coordinate the process and subsequently commission generally @ 3% is received by JatinMadani inform of cash. Shri JatinMadani retain 0.3% of such commission and 0.3% is retained by me and remaining 2.4% is forwarded to Amit Chaudhary. The payment t Shri Amit Chaudhary was made through the angadias in Delhi on his directions. I do not have the residence details of Shri Amit Chaudhary. I have utilized the services of Shri NishantChhajer for providing me account of such accommodation entries/these nsactions on excel sheet.” On examination of the seized material, the Assessing Officer noted that one of the Excel sheets contained an entry showing the assessee as a beneficiary of a sum of ₹22,00,000/- M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd., an entity alleged to be controlled by the Ashish Begwani group. On the basis of material and the information contained therein the Ld. Assessing Officer following due procedure under the law issued notice u/s 153C of the Act on In response, the assessee filed a return declaring the same income as returned originally. After issuing statutory notices and affording opportunity of hearing, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 153C, treating a sum of as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act, being in the nature of an accommodation entry. On appeal, the learned Commissioner of Income upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. The appellate authority noted that the addition was founded on incriminating material seized during the search, including the Excel sheets specifically naming the assessee as a beneficiary, and the statements recorded during the search explaining the systematic manner in which Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 4 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 coordinate the process and subsequently commission generally @ 3% is received by JatinMadani inform of cash. Shri JatinMadani retain 0.3% of such commission and 0.3% is retained by me and remaining 2.4% is forwarded to Amit Chaudhary. The payment to Shri Amit Chaudhary was made through the angadias in Delhi on his directions. I do not have the residence details of Shri Amit Chaudhary. I have utilized the services of Shri NishantChhajer for providing me account of such accommodation entries/these On examination of the seized material, the Assessing Officer noted that one of the Excel sheets contained an entry showing the routed through entity alleged to be controlled by On the basis of material and the information contained therein the Ld. Assessing Officer following due procedure under the law issued notice u/s 153C of the Act on ssessee filed a return declaring the same income as returned originally. After issuing statutory notices and affording opportunity of hearing, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 153C, treating a sum of cash credit under section 68 of the On appeal, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. The appellate authority n incriminating material seized during the search, including the Excel sheets specifically naming the assessee as a beneficiary, and the statements recorded during the search explaining the systematic manner in which Printed from counselvise.com accommodation entries were provided thr explanation of the assessee that the amount represented a genuine advance towards sale of an under unsupported by any contemporaneous and legally enforceable document such as an agreement for sale. (Appeals) further observed that the mere fact that the lender company was legally incorporated and reflected as “active” on the MCA portal did not, by itself, establish the genuineness of the impugned transaction, particularly in the face statements indicating that the said entity was used as a conduit for providing accommodation entries. Accordingly, the addition under section 68 of the Act, as well as the consequential addition towards commission expenditure, was c CIT(A) is reproduced “7.1.2 The appellant contends that the AO erred in making an addition of Rs. 20,00,000/ considering that the source of the money was already explained with necessary evidence. The appellant states that the amount of Rs.20,00,000/ LIMITED on 17/06/2015 was a token amount for selling an under construction residential flat at Ekta Tripolish, Goregaon (West), Mumbai. The appellant claims this is a genuine transaction and has submitted a copy of a letter dated 14/06/2015 from the party confirming this. It is further submitted that the deal was kept on hold due to abnormal delays in construction by the builder and t the project is currently under litigation with MHADA. The appellant has also stated an intention to cancel the deal and return the token amount. 7.1.3 The appellant argues that MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED is a legally registered company under the Companies Act, with an \"ACTIVE\" status on the MCA portal, and regularly files financial statements. The appellant asserts that ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 accommodation entries were provided through shell entities. The explanation of the assessee that the amount represented a genuine advance towards sale of an under-construction flat was found to be unsupported by any contemporaneous and legally enforceable document such as an agreement for sale. The Commissioner (Appeals) further observed that the mere fact that the lender company was legally incorporated and reflected as “active” on the MCA portal did not, by itself, establish the genuineness of the impugned transaction, particularly in the face of direct material and statements indicating that the said entity was used as a conduit for providing accommodation entries. Accordingly, the addition under section 68 of the Act, as well as the consequential addition towards commission expenditure, was confirmed. The relevant finding of ld CIT(A) is reproduced as under: 7.1.2 The appellant contends that the AO erred in making an addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Act, without considering that the source of the money was already explained with necessary evidence. The appellant states that the amount of Rs.20,00,000/- received from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED on 17/06/2015 was a token amount for selling an under construction residential flat at Ekta Tripolish, Goregaon (West), bai. The appellant claims this is a genuine transaction and has submitted a copy of a letter dated 14/06/2015 from the party confirming this. It is further submitted that the deal was kept on hold due to abnormal delays in construction by the builder and t the project is currently under litigation with MHADA. The appellant has also stated an intention to cancel the deal and return the token 7.1.3 The appellant argues that MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED is a legally registered company under the Companies Act, with an \"ACTIVE\" status on the MCA portal, and regularly files financial statements. The appellant asserts that Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 5 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 ough shell entities. The explanation of the assessee that the amount represented a genuine construction flat was found to be unsupported by any contemporaneous and legally enforceable The Commissioner (Appeals) further observed that the mere fact that the lender company was legally incorporated and reflected as “active” on the MCA portal did not, by itself, establish the genuineness of the of direct material and statements indicating that the said entity was used as a conduit for providing accommodation entries. Accordingly, the addition under section 68 of the Act, as well as the consequential addition towards The relevant finding of ld 7.1.2 The appellant contends that the AO erred in making an under Section 68 of the Act, without considering that the source of the money was already explained with necessary evidence. The appellant states that the amount of received from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED on 17/06/2015 was a token amount for selling an under- construction residential flat at Ekta Tripolish, Goregaon (West), bai. The appellant claims this is a genuine transaction and has submitted a copy of a letter dated 14/06/2015 from the party confirming this. It is further submitted that the deal was kept on hold due to abnormal delays in construction by the builder and that the project is currently under litigation with MHADA. The appellant has also stated an intention to cancel the deal and return the token 7.1.3 The appellant argues that MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED is a legally registered company under the Companies Act, with an \"ACTIVE\" status on the MCA portal, and regularly files financial statements. The appellant asserts that Printed from counselvise.com merely because a not mean all transactions undertaken by it are bogus, and each transaction must be examined separately with facts and documentation. The appellant claims no knowledge of Shri Ashish Begwani. The appellant a conducted in the case of MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED confirming their transactions as bogus. The appellant requested the AO to provide impounded/seized documents, reasons for issuing notices u/s 153C, and examination, which were allegedly not provided. The appellant stated that the AO passed the order without considering the responses submitted on 19/12/2022. 7.1.4 The AO made the addition based on information received following a search in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates, who were found to be providers of accommodation entries. An excel sheet seized during this search specifically listed the appellant as a beneficiary of an accommodation entry of Rs. 20,00,000/- from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED. The AO noted that these excel sheets were prepared by Shri Nishant Chhajer on the instructions of Shri Ashish Begwani. Shri Ashish Begwani, in his statement, explained the modus operandi of receiving cash from b descript companies as unsecured loans, for which a commission (generally @3%) was charged. The AO found that MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED was controlled and managed by the Ashish Begwani Group and was u accommodation entries. 7.1.5 Crucially, during the search action in the Ashish Begwani group, a statement of Shri Vikash Agrawal under Section 131 of the Act was recorded, wherein he stated that MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED giving accommodation entries. An annexure to his statement listed MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED among companies he confirmed were bogus and shell entities used solely for providing accommodation entries. AO by issui 10/12/2022 asking for substantial evidence of the genuineness of the transaction, concluded that the transaction was an unexplained accommodation entry and thus taxable under Section 68. 7.1.6 The appellant's primary defense revol that the transaction was a genuine advance for a property sale, supported by a letter from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED. However, this explanation must be weighed against the substantial evidence unearthed during the searc Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates. The discovery of an excel ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 merely because a third party states that the company is bogus does not mean all transactions undertaken by it are bogus, and each transaction must be examined separately with facts and documentation. The appellant claims no knowledge of Shri Ashish Begwani. The appellant also pointed out that no search action was conducted in the case of MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED confirming their transactions as bogus. The appellant requested the AO to provide impounded/seized documents, reasons for issuing notices u/s 153C, and an opportunity for cross examination, which were allegedly not provided. The appellant stated that the AO passed the order without considering the responses submitted on 19/12/2022. 7.1.4 The AO made the addition based on information received search in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates, who were found to be providers of accommodation entries. An excel sheet seized during this search specifically listed the appellant as a beneficiary of an accommodation entry of Rs. from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED. The AO noted that these excel sheets were prepared by Shri Nishant Chhajer on the instructions of Shri Ashish Begwani. Shri Ashish Begwani, in his statement, explained the modus operandi of receiving cash from beneficiaries and providing funds through non descript companies as unsecured loans, for which a commission (generally @3%) was charged. The AO found that MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED was controlled and managed by the Ashish Begwani Group and was used for providing such accommodation entries. 7.1.5 Crucially, during the search action in the Ashish Begwani group, a statement of Shri Vikash Agrawal under Section 131 of the Act was recorded, wherein he stated that MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED was a bogus company created for giving accommodation entries. An annexure to his statement listed MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED among companies he confirmed were bogus and shell entities used solely for providing accommodation entries. AO by issuing a show-cause notice on 10/12/2022 asking for substantial evidence of the genuineness of the transaction, concluded that the transaction was an unexplained accommodation entry and thus taxable under Section 68. 7.1.6 The appellant's primary defense revolves around the assertion that the transaction was a genuine advance for a property sale, supported by a letter from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED. However, this explanation must be weighed against the substantial evidence unearthed during the search operations on Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates. The discovery of an excel Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 6 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 third party states that the company is bogus does not mean all transactions undertaken by it are bogus, and each transaction must be examined separately with facts and documentation. The appellant claims no knowledge of Shri Ashish lso pointed out that no search action was conducted in the case of MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED confirming their transactions as bogus. The appellant requested the AO to provide impounded/seized documents, reasons an opportunity for cross- examination, which were allegedly not provided. The appellant stated that the AO passed the order without considering the 7.1.4 The AO made the addition based on information received search in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates, who were found to be providers of accommodation entries. An excel sheet seized during this search specifically listed the appellant as a beneficiary of an accommodation entry of Rs. from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED. The AO noted that these excel sheets were prepared by Shri Nishant Chhajer on the instructions of Shri Ashish Begwani. Shri Ashish Begwani, in his statement, explained the modus operandi of eneficiaries and providing funds through non- descript companies as unsecured loans, for which a commission (generally @3%) was charged. The AO found that MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED was controlled and managed by the sed for providing such 7.1.5 Crucially, during the search action in the Ashish Begwani group, a statement of Shri Vikash Agrawal under Section 131 of the Act was recorded, wherein he stated that MAA VAISHNAVI was a bogus company created for giving accommodation entries. An annexure to his statement listed MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED among companies he confirmed were bogus and shell entities used solely for providing cause notice on 10/12/2022 asking for substantial evidence of the genuineness of the transaction, concluded that the transaction was an unexplained accommodation entry and thus taxable under Section 68. ves around the assertion that the transaction was a genuine advance for a property sale, supported by a letter from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED. However, this explanation must be weighed against the h operations on Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates. The discovery of an excel Printed from counselvise.com sheet specifically naming the appellant as a beneficiary of an entry from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, coupled with the statement of Shri Ashish Begwani detailing t providing accommodation entries through such companies, casts serious doubt on the genuineness of the transaction. 7.1.7 Furthermore, the statement of Shri Vikash Agrawal, a director in MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, unequivoca identifies this company as a \"bogus and shell entity\" used for providing accommodation entries. This direct admission from an insider involved with the company significantly undermines the appellant's claim of a genuine business transaction and the evidentiary value of the letter dated 14/06/2015. 7.1.8 The appellant's arguments regarding the legal registration and \"ACTIVE\" MCA status of MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED do not, in themselves, prove the genuineness of this specific transaction. It i accommodation entries to maintain a basic level of legal compliance to mask their actual activities. The specific intelligence and direct statements gathered during the search are more pertinent to the nature of this transaction than the general MCA status. 7.1.9 The claims of construction delays and the intention to return the money are subsequent events that do not alter the nature of the receipt at the time it occurred. The onus is on the appellant to prove the identity, creditworthiness of the creditor, and the genuineness of the transaction to the satisfaction of the AO, which, in light of the overwhelming contrary evidence from the search, has not been met. The AO's order indicates that the appellant's submiss considered, but found insufficient against the evidence pointing towards it being an accommodation entry. 7.1.10 To substantiate the claim that the Rs. 20,00,000 received was a genuine advance for a future property sale, the appellant, Smt. Bhavika Ravi Sukhija, should have ideally provided a combination of legally recognized following documents that establish the intent, agreement, and terms of such a transaction. 7.1.11 Agreement for Sale (Registered or Notarized): This is the most crucial document. An Agreement for Sale would typically detail:  Names and details of the seller (appellant) and the buyer (MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED).  Complete description of the property being sold (including its status as under  Total sale ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 sheet specifically naming the appellant as a beneficiary of an entry from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, coupled with the statement of Shri Ashish Begwani detailing the modus operandi of providing accommodation entries through such companies, casts serious doubt on the genuineness of the transaction. 7.1.7 Furthermore, the statement of Shri Vikash Agrawal, a director in MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, unequivoca identifies this company as a \"bogus and shell entity\" used for providing accommodation entries. This direct admission from an insider involved with the company significantly undermines the appellant's claim of a genuine business transaction and the dentiary value of the letter dated 14/06/2015. 7.1.8 The appellant's arguments regarding the legal registration and \"ACTIVE\" MCA status of MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED do not, in themselves, prove the genuineness of this specific transaction. It is common for entities engaged in providing accommodation entries to maintain a basic level of legal compliance to mask their actual activities. The specific intelligence and direct statements gathered during the search are more pertinent to the his transaction than the general MCA status. 7.1.9 The claims of construction delays and the intention to return the money are subsequent events that do not alter the nature of the receipt at the time it occurred. The onus is on the appellant to prove identity, creditworthiness of the creditor, and the genuineness of the transaction to the satisfaction of the AO, which, in light of the overwhelming contrary evidence from the search, has not been met. The AO's order indicates that the appellant's submiss considered, but found insufficient against the evidence pointing towards it being an accommodation entry. 7.1.10 To substantiate the claim that the Rs. 20,00,000 received was a genuine advance for a future property sale, the appellant, ika Ravi Sukhija, should have ideally provided a combination of legally recognized following documents that establish the intent, agreement, and terms of such a transaction. 7.1.11 Agreement for Sale (Registered or Notarized): This is the most ment. An Agreement for Sale would typically detail: Names and details of the seller (appellant) and the buyer (MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED). Complete description of the property being sold (including its status as under- construction). Total sale consideration. Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 7 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 sheet specifically naming the appellant as a beneficiary of an entry from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, coupled with the he modus operandi of providing accommodation entries through such companies, casts 7.1.7 Furthermore, the statement of Shri Vikash Agrawal, a director in MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, unequivocally identifies this company as a \"bogus and shell entity\" used for providing accommodation entries. This direct admission from an insider involved with the company significantly undermines the appellant's claim of a genuine business transaction and the 7.1.8 The appellant's arguments regarding the legal registration and \"ACTIVE\" MCA status of MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED do not, in themselves, prove the genuineness of this s common for entities engaged in providing accommodation entries to maintain a basic level of legal compliance to mask their actual activities. The specific intelligence and direct statements gathered during the search are more pertinent to the his transaction than the general MCA status. 7.1.9 The claims of construction delays and the intention to return the money are subsequent events that do not alter the nature of the receipt at the time it occurred. The onus is on the appellant to prove identity, creditworthiness of the creditor, and the genuineness of the transaction to the satisfaction of the AO, which, in light of the overwhelming contrary evidence from the search, has not been met. The AO's order indicates that the appellant's submissions were considered, but found insufficient against the evidence pointing 7.1.10 To substantiate the claim that the Rs. 20,00,000 received was a genuine advance for a future property sale, the appellant, ika Ravi Sukhija, should have ideally provided a combination of legally recognized following documents that establish the intent, agreement, and terms of such a transaction. 7.1.11 Agreement for Sale (Registered or Notarized): This is the most ment. An Agreement for Sale would typically detail: Names and details of the seller (appellant) and the buyer Complete description of the property being sold (including its Printed from counselvise.com  The amount received as advance or token money (Rs. 20,00,000 in this case).  Terms and conditions of the sale, including timelines for future payments and completion of the sale.  Clauses regarding forfeiture or refund of the advance in case of non-  Signatures of both parties and witnesses.  While registration is ideal for enforceability, even a notarized agreement would lend more credence than a simple letter.  Correspondence with the Buyer: Any formal communication (emails, letters VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED regarding the property sale, negotiations, terms, reason for payment, etc., preferably exchanged around the time of the transaction.  Resolution by the Buyer (if a company): If the buyer is a company like MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, a board resolution authorizing the purchase of the property and payment of the advance would be a strong supporting document. 7.1.12 The appellant has argued that the \"said amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- accounting entry, it is not a legal document proving the nature of the transaction with the third party. 7.1.13 The primary document submitted by the appellant to support her claim appears to be a letter dated VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED. 7.1.14 While this letter might state the intention of the transaction, it falls short of the robustness of an \"Agreement for Sale.\" An Agreement for Sale would have more detailed terms and legal standing. The AO gave this letter limited evidentiary value, especially in light of the substantial contrary evidence suggesting MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED was a shell entity involved in providing accommodation entries. The reliance was primarily on circumstances and the alleged nature of the buyer, was insufficient to overcome the AO's findings based on the search and seizure operations. 7.1.15 The appellant's contention about not knowing Shri Ashish Begwani is not material, as such entry networks often involve multiple layers of intermediaries. The absence of a separate search on MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED does not invalidate the findings derived from the search on the main operator, Shri Ashish Begwani, who controlled and managed such entities for ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 The amount received as advance or token money (Rs. 20,00,000 in this case). Terms and conditions of the sale, including timelines for future payments and completion of the sale. Clauses regarding forfeiture or refund of the advance in case - completion. Signatures of both parties and witnesses. While registration is ideal for enforceability, even a notarized agreement would lend more credence than a simple letter. Correspondence with the Buyer: Any formal communication (emails, letters) between the appellant and MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED regarding the property sale, negotiations, terms, reason for payment, etc., preferably exchanged around the time of the transaction. Resolution by the Buyer (if a company): If the buyer is a company like MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, a board resolution authorizing the purchase of the property and payment of the advance would be a strong supporting document. 7.1.12 The appellant has argued that the \"said amount of Rs. still exists in my books\". While this indicates an accounting entry, it is not a legal document proving the nature of the transaction with the third party. 7.1.13 The primary document submitted by the appellant to support her claim appears to be a letter dated 14/06/2015 from MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED. 7.1.14 While this letter might state the intention of the transaction, it falls short of the robustness of an \"Agreement for Sale.\" An Agreement for Sale would have more detailed terms and legal ing. The AO gave this letter limited evidentiary value, especially in light of the substantial contrary evidence suggesting MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED was a shell entity involved in providing accommodation entries. The reliance was primarily on the letter from the buying party, which, given the circumstances and the alleged nature of the buyer, was insufficient to overcome the AO's findings based on the search and seizure 7.1.15 The appellant's contention about not knowing Shri Ashish Begwani is not material, as such entry networks often involve multiple layers of intermediaries. The absence of a separate search on MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED does not invalidate the findings derived from the search on the main operator, Shri Ashish Begwani, who controlled and managed such entities for Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 8 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 The amount received as advance or token money (Rs. Terms and conditions of the sale, including timelines for Clauses regarding forfeiture or refund of the advance in case While registration is ideal for enforceability, even a notarized agreement would lend more credence than a simple letter. Correspondence with the Buyer: Any formal communication ) between the appellant and MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED regarding the property sale, negotiations, terms, reason for payment, etc., preferably Resolution by the Buyer (if a company): If the buyer is a company like MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, a board resolution authorizing the purchase of the property and payment of the advance would be a strong supporting 7.1.12 The appellant has argued that the \"said amount of Rs. l exists in my books\". While this indicates an accounting entry, it is not a legal document proving the nature of the 7.1.13 The primary document submitted by the appellant to support 14/06/2015 from MAA 7.1.14 While this letter might state the intention of the transaction, it falls short of the robustness of an \"Agreement for Sale.\" An Agreement for Sale would have more detailed terms and legal ing. The AO gave this letter limited evidentiary value, especially in light of the substantial contrary evidence suggesting MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED was a shell entity involved in providing accommodation entries. The reliance was the letter from the buying party, which, given the circumstances and the alleged nature of the buyer, was insufficient to overcome the AO's findings based on the search and seizure 7.1.15 The appellant's contention about not knowing Shri Ashish Begwani is not material, as such entry networks often involve multiple layers of intermediaries. The absence of a separate search on MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED does not invalidate the findings derived from the search on the main operator, Shri Ashish Begwani, who controlled and managed such entities for Printed from counselvise.com providing accommodation entries. The core evidence, including the excel sheet detailing the appellant's transaction and the statements of key persons involved, forms a direct nexus to the appella transaction. 7.1.16 The AO has relied upon credible information and seized material from a search action that implicated MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED as a shell company providing accommodation entries and the appellant as a beneficiary. 7.1.17 Therefore, Ground No. 1 is dismissed, and the addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- under Section 68 is upheld. 7.2 Decision on Ground No.2: In Ground No.2, the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs. 60,000/ I.T. Act, 1961. 7.2.1 The appellant argues that the AO erred in making an addition of Rs. 60,000/ Section 69C, asserting that this amount, purported to be commission, was never paid by the appellant. The appellant states this addition is baseless as the main transaction of Rs. 20,00,000/ was genuine and not an accommodation entry. The appellant claims the addition is based merely on wrong information from a third party, ignoring documentary evidence. 7.2.2 The AO made the addition of R expenditure under Section 69C, calculating it as commission paid @3% on the accommodation entry of Rs. 20,00,000/ based on the modus operandi explained by Shri Ashish Begwani during the post commission (generally @3%) was received in cash for providing such entries. Since the primary transaction was treated as an unexplained cash credit, the related commission for facilitating this entry was considered unexplained expenditu 7.2.3 Given the decision on Ground No. 1, where the transaction of Rs. 20,00,000/ the nature of an accommodation entry, the basis of the appellant's argument for this ground (i.e., the genuineness of th transaction) is not tenable. 7.2.4 The modus operandi of accommodation entry providers, as detailed in the assessment order based on the statement of Shri Ashish Begwani, typically involves the payment of a commission in cash by the beneficiary 3% is specifically mentioned as the general commission rate. While ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 providing accommodation entries. The core evidence, including the excel sheet detailing the appellant's transaction and the statements of key persons involved, forms a direct nexus to the appella 7.1.16 The AO has relied upon credible information and seized material from a search action that implicated MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED as a shell company providing accommodation entries and the appellant as a beneficiary. 7 Therefore, Ground No. 1 is dismissed, and the addition of Rs. under Section 68 is upheld. 7.2 Decision on Ground No.2: In Ground No.2, the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs. 60,000/- under Section 69C of the I.T. Act, 1961. e appellant argues that the AO erred in making an addition of Rs. 60,000/- on account of unexplained expenditure under Section 69C, asserting that this amount, purported to be commission, was never paid by the appellant. The appellant states is baseless as the main transaction of Rs. 20,00,000/ was genuine and not an accommodation entry. The appellant claims the addition is based merely on wrong information from a third party, ignoring documentary evidence. 7.2.2 The AO made the addition of Rs. 60,000/- as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C, calculating it as commission paid @3% on the accommodation entry of Rs. 20,00,000/ based on the modus operandi explained by Shri Ashish Begwani during the post-search investigation, wherein he stated that a commission (generally @3%) was received in cash for providing such entries. Since the primary transaction was treated as an unexplained cash credit, the related commission for facilitating this entry was considered unexplained expenditure. 7.2.3 Given the decision on Ground No. 1, where the transaction of Rs. 20,00,000/- has been upheld as an unexplained cash credit in the nature of an accommodation entry, the basis of the appellant's argument for this ground (i.e., the genuineness of th transaction) is not tenable. 7.2.4 The modus operandi of accommodation entry providers, as detailed in the assessment order based on the statement of Shri Ashish Begwani, typically involves the payment of a commission in cash by the beneficiary to the provider of such entries. The rate of 3% is specifically mentioned as the general commission rate. While Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 9 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 providing accommodation entries. The core evidence, including the excel sheet detailing the appellant's transaction and the statements of key persons involved, forms a direct nexus to the appellant's 7.1.16 The AO has relied upon credible information and seized material from a search action that implicated MAA VAISHNAVI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED as a shell company providing accommodation entries and the appellant as a beneficiary. 7 Therefore, Ground No. 1 is dismissed, and the addition of Rs. 7.2 Decision on Ground No.2: In Ground No.2, the appellant has under Section 69C of the e appellant argues that the AO erred in making an addition on account of unexplained expenditure under Section 69C, asserting that this amount, purported to be commission, was never paid by the appellant. The appellant states is baseless as the main transaction of Rs. 20,00,000/- was genuine and not an accommodation entry. The appellant claims the addition is based merely on wrong information from a third as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C, calculating it as commission paid @3% on the accommodation entry of Rs. 20,00,000/-. This was based on the modus operandi explained by Shri Ashish Begwani in he stated that a commission (generally @3%) was received in cash for providing such entries. Since the primary transaction was treated as an unexplained cash credit, the related commission for facilitating this 7.2.3 Given the decision on Ground No. 1, where the transaction of has been upheld as an unexplained cash credit in the nature of an accommodation entry, the basis of the appellant's argument for this ground (i.e., the genuineness of the primary 7.2.4 The modus operandi of accommodation entry providers, as detailed in the assessment order based on the statement of Shri Ashish Begwani, typically involves the payment of a commission in to the provider of such entries. The rate of 3% is specifically mentioned as the general commission rate. While Printed from counselvise.com direct evidence of cash commission payment might be difficult to obtain in such clandestine arrangements, the inference of such expenditure is a established as an accommodation entry. The excel sheet itself, which detailed these financial movements, was part of a system where commissions were an integral component. 7.2.5 The AO's action in estimating based on the evidence gathered during the search and the consistent pattern of such transactions. The appellant's denial of paying any commission is a self the primary transaction itself has b The addition under Section 69C is consequential to the finding that the amount of Rs. 20,00,000/ 4. Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee filed a paper book containing pages 1 to 22, containing a provisional booking letter relating to a flat in the project “Ekta Tripolish”, Goregaon, and a copy of the registered deed dated 21.04.2016. The Assessing Officer proceeded on the basis of information emanating from a search conducted in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates, wherein it was revealed that entities controlled by the said group were engaged in providing accommodation entries in the guise of unsecured loans. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee was a beneficiary of such an accommodation entry of ₹20,00,000/- routed through M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd., an entity alleged to be controlled and operated by the said group. 4.1 The assessee does not dispute the receipt of the said amount from M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd.; however, the consistent stand of the assessee is that the amount was not a loan but an advance received against the proposed sale of a residential flat, namely Flat ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 direct evidence of cash commission payment might be difficult to obtain in such clandestine arrangements, the inference of such expenditure is a natural corollary once the main transaction is established as an accommodation entry. The excel sheet itself, which detailed these financial movements, was part of a system where commissions were an integral component. 7.2.5 The AO's action in estimating the commission expenditure is based on the evidence gathered during the search and the consistent pattern of such transactions. The appellant's denial of paying any commission is a self-serving statement especially when the primary transaction itself has been found to be non The addition under Section 69C is consequential to the finding that the amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- was an accommodation entry. he learned counsel for the assessee filed a paper book containing pages 1 to 22, containing a provisional booking letter relating to a flat in the project “Ekta Tripolish”, Goregaon, and a copy of the registered deed dated 21.04.2016. The Assessing proceeded on the basis of information emanating from a search conducted in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates, wherein it was revealed that entities controlled by the said group were engaged in providing accommodation entries in the of unsecured loans. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee was a beneficiary of such an accommodation entry of routed through M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd., an entity alleged to be controlled and operated by the said group. essee does not dispute the receipt of the said amount from M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd.; however, the consistent stand of the assessee is that the amount was not a loan but an advance received against the proposed sale of a residential flat, namely Flat Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 10 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 direct evidence of cash commission payment might be difficult to obtain in such clandestine arrangements, the inference of such natural corollary once the main transaction is established as an accommodation entry. The excel sheet itself, which detailed these financial movements, was part of a system the commission expenditure is based on the evidence gathered during the search and the consistent pattern of such transactions. The appellant's denial of serving statement especially when een found to be non-genuine. The addition under Section 69C is consequential to the finding that was an accommodation entry.” he learned counsel for the assessee filed a paper book containing pages 1 to 22, containing a provisional booking letter relating to a flat in the project “Ekta Tripolish”, Goregaon, and a copy of the registered deed dated 21.04.2016. The Assessing proceeded on the basis of information emanating from a search conducted in the case of Shri Ashish Begwani and his associates, wherein it was revealed that entities controlled by the said group were engaged in providing accommodation entries in the of unsecured loans. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee was a beneficiary of such an accommodation entry of routed through M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd., an entity alleged to be controlled and operated by the said group. essee does not dispute the receipt of the said amount from M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd.; however, the consistent stand of the assessee is that the amount was not a loan but an advance received against the proposed sale of a residential flat, namely Flat Printed from counselvise.com No. B-506 in the project “Ekta Tripolish”, Goregaon, Mumbai. In support of this contention, reliance has been placed on a letter purportedly issued by a Director of M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. stating that the flat was agreed to be purchased for a considerati of ₹2 crores and that a token amount of Rs. 20 lakhs was paid to the assessee. The assessee has also produced certain e correspondence exchanged in the year 2024 regarding cancellation of the proposed transaction and refund of the amount, along wi letter dated 05.08.2024 seeking such refund. paper book pages 7 and 8 has shown that said amount was refunded by way of bank transaction to Maa Vaishnavi. nutshell , the assessee has claimed that said amount was not loan and assessee merely an advance against sale of property. 4.2 The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, has seriously disputed the credibility of the aforesaid documents. It was contended that no contemporaneous correspondence evidencing negotiation or agreement for purchase of the property has been produced. It was emphasised that the e pertain to the year 2024, whereas the property itself stood registered in the assessee’s name as early as 2016. According to the Revenue, it is inherently improbable that a substantial advance of ₹20,00,000/- would be paid without any agreement for sale and that refund would be sought after an inordinate lapse of time of nearly a decade. It was therefore submitted that the assessee has ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 506 in the project “Ekta Tripolish”, Goregaon, Mumbai. In support of this contention, reliance has been placed on a letter purportedly issued by a Director of M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. stating that the flat was agreed to be purchased for a considerati 2 crores and that a token amount of Rs. 20 lakhs was paid to the assessee. The assessee has also produced certain e correspondence exchanged in the year 2024 regarding cancellation of the proposed transaction and refund of the amount, along wi letter dated 05.08.2024 seeking such refund. The assessee in his paper book pages 7 and 8 has shown that said amount was refunded by way of bank transaction to Maa Vaishnavi. , the assessee has claimed that said amount was not loan assessee merely an advance against sale of property. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, has seriously disputed the credibility of the aforesaid documents. It was contended that no contemporaneous correspondence otiation or agreement for purchase of the property has been produced. It was emphasised that the e-mails relied upon pertain to the year 2024, whereas the property itself stood registered in the assessee’s name as early as 2016. According to the t is inherently improbable that a substantial advance of would be paid without any agreement for sale and that refund would be sought after an inordinate lapse of time of nearly a decade. It was therefore submitted that the assessee has Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 11 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 506 in the project “Ekta Tripolish”, Goregaon, Mumbai. In support of this contention, reliance has been placed on a letter purportedly issued by a Director of M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. stating that the flat was agreed to be purchased for a consideration 2 crores and that a token amount of Rs. 20 lakhs was paid to the assessee. The assessee has also produced certain e-mail correspondence exchanged in the year 2024 regarding cancellation of the proposed transaction and refund of the amount, along with a The assessee in his paper book pages 7 and 8 has shown that said amount was refunded by way of bank transaction to Maa Vaishnavi. In the , the assessee has claimed that said amount was not loan assessee merely an advance against sale of property. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, has seriously disputed the credibility of the aforesaid documents. It was contended that no contemporaneous correspondence otiation or agreement for purchase of the property mails relied upon pertain to the year 2024, whereas the property itself stood registered in the assessee’s name as early as 2016. According to the t is inherently improbable that a substantial advance of would be paid without any agreement for sale and that refund would be sought after an inordinate lapse of time of nearly a decade. It was therefore submitted that the assessee has Printed from counselvise.com failed to discharge the burden of proving that the receipt was anything other than a loan in the nature of an accommodation entry. 5. We have considered the rival submissions in the light of the material on record. The core issue that arises for our determinatio is whether the sum of M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. was in the nature of a loan or constituted an advance against the proposed sale of immovable property. This distinction is of material significance, as in the former case the onus squarely lies on the assessee to satisfy the requirements of section 68 of the Act, whereas in the latter case the receipt would partake the character of a business or capital transaction, subject to its genuineness being established. 5.1 During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee was specifically called upon to place on record the financial statements of M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. to demonstrate whether the impugned amount was reflected therein as an advance for purchase of property or as a loan. The assessee was also asked to furnish any contemporaneous document such as a board resolution of the said company authorising the purchase of the property and payment of advance. No such evidence was produced at this stage. The learned counsel, however, submitted that the assessee would be in a position to place such material on record if one more opportunity were granted. ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 to discharge the burden of proving that the receipt was anything other than a loan in the nature of an accommodation We have considered the rival submissions in the light of the material on record. The core issue that arises for our determinatio is whether the sum of ₹20,00,000/- received by the assessee from M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. was in the nature of a loan or constituted an advance against the proposed sale of immovable property. This distinction is of material significance, as in the rmer case the onus squarely lies on the assessee to satisfy the requirements of section 68 of the Act, whereas in the latter case the receipt would partake the character of a business or capital transaction, subject to its genuineness being established. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee was specifically called upon to place on record the financial statements of M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. to demonstrate whether the impugned amount was reflected therein as an advance purchase of property or as a loan. The assessee was also asked to furnish any contemporaneous document such as a board resolution of the said company authorising the purchase of the property and payment of advance. No such evidence was produced age. The learned counsel, however, submitted that the assessee would be in a position to place such material on record if one more opportunity were granted. Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 12 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 to discharge the burden of proving that the receipt was anything other than a loan in the nature of an accommodation We have considered the rival submissions in the light of the material on record. The core issue that arises for our determination received by the assessee from M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. was in the nature of a loan or constituted an advance against the proposed sale of immovable property. This distinction is of material significance, as in the rmer case the onus squarely lies on the assessee to satisfy the requirements of section 68 of the Act, whereas in the latter case the receipt would partake the character of a business or capital transaction, subject to its genuineness being established. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee was specifically called upon to place on record the financial statements of M/s Maa Vaishnavi Pvt. Ltd. to demonstrate whether the impugned amount was reflected therein as an advance purchase of property or as a loan. The assessee was also asked to furnish any contemporaneous document such as a board resolution of the said company authorising the purchase of the property and payment of advance. No such evidence was produced age. The learned counsel, however, submitted that the assessee would be in a position to place such material on record if Printed from counselvise.com 5.2 In the facts and circumstances of the case, and having regard to the nature of the dispute, we issue cannot be conclusively adjudicated without proper examination of the aforesaid aspects. The determination of the true character of the receipt against property—goes to the very ro section 68 of the Act. In the interest of justice, therefore, it would be appropriate to afford the assessee one final opportunity to substantiate its claim by producing cogent and contemporaneous evidence, including but not l the payer company, board resolutions, agreements, and relevant correspondence. 5.3 Accordingly, the issue relating to the addition of is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication in accordance with law at liberty to conduct such enquiries, verifications, and investigations as may be considered necessary or expedient proper determination of the true nature and character of the impugned receipt, including examination of books of account, financial statements, bank records, agreements, resolutions, electronic correspondence, and any other material, whether already on record or brought on record during the remand proceedings. ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 In the facts and circumstances of the case, and having regard to the nature of the dispute, we are of the considered view that the issue cannot be conclusively adjudicated without proper examination of the aforesaid aspects. The determination of the true character of the receipt—whether as a loan or as an advance goes to the very root of the addition made under section 68 of the Act. In the interest of justice, therefore, it would be appropriate to afford the assessee one final opportunity to substantiate its claim by producing cogent and contemporaneous evidence, including but not limited to the financial statements of the payer company, board resolutions, agreements, and relevant Accordingly, the issue relating to the addition of is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for on in accordance with law. The Assessing Officer shall be conduct such enquiries, verifications, and investigations as may be considered necessary or expedient proper determination of the true nature and character of the including examination of books of account, financial statements, bank records, agreements, resolutions, electronic correspondence, and any other material, whether already on record or brought on record during the remand proceedings. Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 13 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 In the facts and circumstances of the case, and having regard are of the considered view that the issue cannot be conclusively adjudicated without proper examination of the aforesaid aspects. The determination of the true whether as a loan or as an advance ot of the addition made under section 68 of the Act. In the interest of justice, therefore, it would be appropriate to afford the assessee one final opportunity to substantiate its claim by producing cogent and contemporaneous imited to the financial statements of the payer company, board resolutions, agreements, and relevant Accordingly, the issue relating to the addition of ₹20,00,000/- is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo The Assessing Officer shall be conduct such enquiries, verifications, and investigations as may be considered necessary or expedient for proper determination of the true nature and character of the including examination of books of account, financial statements, bank records, agreements, resolutions, electronic correspondence, and any other material, whether already on record or brought on record during the remand proceedings. Printed from counselvise.com 5.4 The Assessing Offi lawful inferences as may arise from the material available on record, subject, however, to affording the assessee effective opportunity of being heard confrontation with all ma decided uninfluenced by the earlier findings reasoned and speaking order 5.5 Since the addition of towards alleged commission expenditure is consequential and intrinsically linked to the determination of the nature of the primary receipt of ₹20,00,000/ Assessing Officer to be decided afresh in accordance with the outcome of the proceedings on the main issue. 5.6 The grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/- (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 24/12/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 The Assessing Officer shall also be at liberty to lawful inferences as may arise from the material available on subject, however, to affording the assessee effective opportunity of being heard, including access to and confrontation with all material relied upon. The issue shall be uninfluenced by the earlier findings and by passing a reasoned and speaking order. Since the addition of ₹60,000/- under section 69C of the Act towards alleged commission expenditure is consequential and ntrinsically linked to the determination of the nature of the primary 20,00,000/-, the same is also restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to be decided afresh in accordance with the outcome of the proceedings on the main issue. grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for ounced in the open Court on 24/12/2025. (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 14 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 cer shall also be at liberty to draw such lawful inferences as may arise from the material available on subject, however, to affording the assessee adequate and including access to and terial relied upon. The issue shall be and by passing a under section 69C of the Act towards alleged commission expenditure is consequential and ntrinsically linked to the determination of the nature of the primary , the same is also restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to be decided afresh in accordance with the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for /12/2025. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Printed from counselvise.com 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. 5220/MUM/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Bhavika Ravi Sukhija 15 ITA No. 5220/MUM/2025 BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "