Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeals are against orders passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (PCIT) under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The PCIT initiated revision proceedings, holding that the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to conduct necessary inquiries regarding the reconciliation of revenue receipts with trade receivables. The original assessment orders for AY 2012-13 and 2015-16 were passed under section 153A after a search operation.
Held
The Tribunal held that the PCIT rightly invoked Section 263. The AO's assessment was considered erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue because of a lack of proper inquiry into the significant discrepancy between revenue from operations and the increase in trade receivables. The AO mechanically placed information on record without sufficient application of mind.
Key Issues
Whether the Assessing Officer conducted a proper inquiry into the discrepancy between revenue from operations and trade receivables, and whether the PCIT erred in invoking revisionary powers under Section 263.
Sections Cited
263, 153A, 132, 143(3), 142(1), 119
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT
ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders, both dated 31.03.2025, passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Mumbai – 1 [in short ‘the Ld. PCIT’] for assessment year 2012-13 and 2015-16 respectively, in terms of section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’), wherein the assessment order(s) passed by the ld.
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 Assessing Officer (AO) (AO) u/s 153A of the Act have been held to be u/s 153A of the Act have been held to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue.
Firstly, we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment Firstly, we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment Firstly, we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2012-13. The grounds raised
by the assessee in 13. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal are 13. The grounds raised by the assessee in reproduced as under: reproduced as under:
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) erred in initiating Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) erred in initiating Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) erred in initiating revision proceedings u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide revision proceedings u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide revision proceedings u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide show-cause notice dated 1 cause notice dated 19-02-2025 and thereby passing an order 2025 and thereby passing an order u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 therefore erred in seeking u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 therefore erred in seeking u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 therefore erred in seeking revision of the assessment order by setting aside Assessment order revision of the assessment order by setting aside Assessment order revision of the assessment order by setting aside Assessment order passed under section 143(3)rws 153A, which was neither passed under section 143(3)rws 153A, which was neither passed under section 143(3)rws 153A, which was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to th erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
2. The Ld. PCIT erred in invoking the revisionary power under 2. The Ld. PCIT erred in invoking the revisionary power under 2. The Ld. PCIT erred in invoking the revisionary power under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the Ld. Assessing officer (AO) completed the assessment fact that the Ld. Assessing officer (AO) completed the assessment fact that the Ld. Assessing officer (AO) completed the assessment under section 143(3) rws 153A of the Inc under section 143(3) rws 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after ome Tax Act, 1961 after proper application of mind by accepting the claim of the appellant, proper application of mind by accepting the claim of the appellant, proper application of mind by accepting the claim of the appellant, which was in accordance with the provisions of law. which was in accordance with the provisions of law.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a search and Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a search and Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income was conducted on 08.02.2021 at the premises of the “JMJ” group of was conducted on 08.02.2021 at the premises of the “JMJ” group of was conducted on 08.02.2021 at the premises of the “JMJ” group of entities, including the assessee. Pursuant thereto, a notice under entities, including the assessee. Pursuant thereto, a notice un entities, including the assessee. Pursuant thereto, a notice un section 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee on 17.12.2021. section 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee on 17.12.2021. section 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee on 17.12.2021. In compliance, the assessee filed its return of income on 28.01.2022 In compliance, the assessee filed its return of income on 28.01.2022 In compliance, the assessee filed its return of income on 28.01.2022 declaring a total loss of ₹2,07,30,769/-. The assessment under declaring a total loss of . The assessment under section 153A of the Act was completed on 06.04.2022, wherein the section 153A of the Act was completed on 06.04.2022, section 153A of the Act was completed on 06.04.2022, loss as returned by the assessee was accepted. loss as returned by the assessee was accepted.
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 3.1 Subsequently, the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Subsequently, the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Subsequently, the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax called for and examined the assessment records. Upon such called for and examined the assessment records. Upon such called for and examined the assessment records. Upon such examination, he formed a prima facie view that the Ld. Assessing examination, he formed a prima facie view that the Ld. Assessing examination, he formed a prima facie view that the Ld. Assessing Officer had failed to conduct the necessary inquiries which were failed to conduct the necessary inquiries which were failed to conduct the necessary inquiries which were warranted, particularly with respect to reconciliation of the revenue warranted, particularly with respect to reconciliation of the revenue warranted, particularly with respect to reconciliation of the revenue receipts reflected in the profit and loss account with the trade receipts reflected in the profit and loss account with the trade receipts reflected in the profit and loss account with the trade receivables/sundry debtors disclosed in the balance sheet. The Ld. receivables/sundry debtors disclosed in the balance sheet. The Ld. receivables/sundry debtors disclosed in the balance sheet. The Ld. Principal Commissioner was not satisfied with the explanation Principal Commissioner was not satisfied with the explanation Principal Commissioner was not satisfied with the explanation furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, by an order passed under furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, by an order passed under furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, by an order passed under section 263 of the Act dated 31.03.2025, and by invoking section 263 of the Act dated 31.03.2025, and by invoking section 263 of the Act dated 31.03.2025, and by invoking Explanation 2 to section 263, he set aside the assessment order Explanation 2 to section 263, he set aside the assessment order Explanation 2 to section 263, he set aside the assessment order with a direction to the Ld. Assessing Officer to pass a fresh irection to the Ld. Assessing Officer to pass a fresh irection to the Ld. Assessing Officer to pass a fresh assessment assessment assessment order order order after after after due due due verification verification verification of of of the the the assessee’s assessee’s assessee’s justification for the variation between revenue from operations justification for the variation between revenue from operations justification for the variation between revenue from operations shown in the profit and loss account and the trade receivables shown in the profit and loss account and the trade receivables shown in the profit and loss account and the trade receivables reflected in the balance sheet. Aggrieved by the said order, the balance sheet. Aggrieved by the said order, the balance sheet. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal, assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal, assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal, raising the grounds reproduced hereinabove. raising the grounds reproduced hereinabove.
Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee filed a Paper Book Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee filed a Paper Book Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee filed a Paper Book containing pages 1 to 72. containing pages 1 to 72.
The sole issue arising from the grounds of appeal pertains to ole issue arising from the grounds of appeal pertains to ole issue arising from the grounds of appeal pertains to the correctness and legality of the order passed by the Ld. Principal the correctness and legality of the order passed by the Ld. Principal the correctness and legality of the order passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 of the Act. tax under section 263 of the Act.
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 5.1 The Ld. counsel for the assessee, at the outset, referred to the The Ld. counsel for the assessee, at the outset, referred to the The Ld. counsel for the assessee, at the outset, referred to the written submissions filed before the Ld. PCIT and contended that tten submissions filed before the Ld. PCIT and contended that tten submissions filed before the Ld. PCIT and contended that the objections raised by the assessee during the proceedings under the objections raised by the assessee during the proceedings under the objections raised by the assessee during the proceedings under section 263 were not duly considered. It was submitted that the section 263 were not duly considered. It was submitted that the section 263 were not duly considered. It was submitted that the assessment under section 153A of the Act was framed pursuant to assessment under section 153A of the Act was framed pursuant to assessment under section 153A of the Act was framed pursuant to a search action conducted on the assessee. Relying upon the a search action conducted on the assessee. Relying upon the a search action conducted on the assessee. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC), the Ld. counsel submitted that in (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC), the Ld. counsel submitted that in (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC), the Ld. counsel submitted that in the absence of any incriminating material pertaining to the year the absence of any incriminating material pertaining to the the absence of any incriminating material pertaining to the under consideration, the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to under consideration, the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to under consideration, the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to make any addition. According to him, the year under appeal was a make any addition. According to him, the year under appeal was a make any addition. According to him, the year under appeal was a completed assessment year and the assessment order does not refer completed assessment year and the assessment order does not refer completed assessment year and the assessment order does not refer to any incriminating material whatsoever. Therefore, the Assessing to any incriminating material whatsoever. Therefore, to any incriminating material whatsoever. Therefore, Officer was legally precluded from making any addition except on Officer was legally precluded from making any addition except on Officer was legally precluded from making any addition except on the basis of incriminating material found during the course of the basis of incriminating material found during the course of the basis of incriminating material found during the course of search. On this premise, it was argued that the Ld. PCIT erred in search. On this premise, it was argued that the Ld. PCIT erred in search. On this premise, it was argued that the Ld. PCIT erred in holding the assessment order to be erroneous and holding the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue merely on the ground that no inquiry was interests of the Revenue merely on the ground that no inquiry was interests of the Revenue merely on the ground that no inquiry was conducted in respect of reconciliation of revenue from operations conducted in respect of reconciliation of revenue from operations conducted in respect of reconciliation of revenue from operations vis-à-vis the increase in trade receivables during the year. vis the increase in trade receivables during the year. vis the increase in trade receivables during the year.
5.2 Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. counsel further counsel further submitted that the assessment order was not erroneous even on submitted that the assessment order was not erroneous even on submitted that the assessment order was not erroneous even on merits. It was contended that for invoking section 263 of the Act, merits. It was contended that for invoking section 263 merits. It was contended that for invoking section 263 both the conditions, both the conditions, namely, that the order is erroneous and namely, that the order is erroneous and JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, to the interests of the Revenue, must co must co-exist. In the absence of satisfaction of either of the conditions, the assumption of absence of satisfaction of either of the conditions, the assumption of absence of satisfaction of either of the conditions, the assumption of jurisdiction under section 263 is unsustainable in law. In this jurisdiction under section 263 is unsustainable in law. In this jurisdiction under section 263 is unsustainable in law. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel Counsel drew our attention to the detailed drew our attention to the detailed explanation furnished by the assessee be explanation furnished by the assessee before the Ld. PCIT during fore the Ld. PCIT during the revision proceedings, wherein a complete reconciliation between the revision proceedings, wherein a complete reconciliation between the revision proceedings, wherein a complete reconciliation between revenue from operations and the increase in trade receivables was revenue from operations and the increase in trade receivables was revenue from operations and the increase in trade receivables was explained. The assessee clarified that the apparent difference arose explained. The assessee clarified that the apparent difference arose explained. The assessee clarified that the apparent difference arose due to the accounting treatm due to the accounting treatment followed in respect of payments ent followed in respect of payments received through payment card processor networks, whereby, at received through payment card processor networks, whereby, at received through payment card processor networks, whereby, at different stages, debtors were reflected first in the name of the different stages, debtors were reflected first in the name of the different stages, debtors were reflected first in the name of the customer and subsequently in the name of the card processor until customer and subsequently in the name of the card processor until customer and subsequently in the name of the card processor until the amount was actually cr the amount was actually credited to the assessee’s bank account. It edited to the assessee’s bank account. It was submitted that this accounting mechanism resulted in a higher was submitted that this accounting mechanism resulted in a higher was submitted that this accounting mechanism resulted in a higher figure of increase in sundry debtors as compared to revenue from figure of increase in sundry debtors as compared to revenue from figure of increase in sundry debtors as compared to revenue from operations, without any understatement of income. operations, without any understatement of income.
5.3 The Ld. counsel further subm The Ld. counsel further submitted that the issue of variation itted that the issue of variation in trade receivables had, in fact, been examined by the Assessing in trade receivables had, in fact, been examined by the Assessing in trade receivables had, in fact, been examined by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. Reference was Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. Reference was Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. Reference was made to the notice issued under section 142(1) dated 02.12.2021 made to the notice issued under section 142(1) dated 02.12.2021 made to the notice issued under section 142(1) dated 02.12.2021 and relevant question ask relevant question asking party-wise details of trade receivables wise details of trade receivables available on Paper Book page 50 (question No. 16). The Ld. counsel available on Paper Book page 50 (question No. 16). The Ld. counsel available on Paper Book page 50 (question No. 16). The Ld. counsel referred to the Paper Book page 54 referred to the Paper Book page 54 and pointed out that the and pointed out that the assessee duly furnished the requisite details in response. A copy of assessee duly furnished the requisite details in response. assessee duly furnished the requisite details in response.
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 such trade receivables is available on Paper Book page 56. vables is available on Paper Book page 56. It was vables is available on Paper Book page 56. thus contended that the Assessing Officer, after raising specific thus contended that the Assessing Officer, after raising specific thus contended that the Assessing Officer, after raising specific queries and examining the replies furnished, had accepted the queries and examining the replies furnished, had accepted the queries and examining the replies furnished, had accepted the explanation of the assessee. Consequently, this was not a case of explanation of the assessee. Consequently, this was not a case of explanation of the assessee. Consequently, this was not a case of “lack of inquiry” so as to attract Explanation 2 to section 263 of the uiry” so as to attract Explanation 2 to section 263 of the uiry” so as to attract Explanation 2 to section 263 of the Act. It was also argued that the assessee has consistently followed a Act. It was also argued that the assessee has consistently followed a Act. It was also argued that the assessee has consistently followed a recognised and accepted method of accounting for recognition of recognised and accepted method of accounting for recognition of recognised and accepted method of accounting for recognition of revenue, and therefore, the assessment order based on such revenue, and therefore, the assessment order based on such revenue, and therefore, the assessment order based on such method cannot be characterised as erroneous or prejudicial to the od cannot be characterised as erroneous or prejudicial to the od cannot be characterised as erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Ld. interests of the Revenue. The Ld. Counsel emphasised that emphasised that revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 cannot be exercised for revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 cannot be exercised for revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 cannot be exercised for the purpose of making roving or fishing inquiries. the purpose of making roving or fishing inquiries.
5.4 Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon e Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon e Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the impugned order passed by the Ld. PCIT. He submitted that the the impugned order passed by the Ld. PCIT. He submitted that the the impugned order passed by the Ld. PCIT. He submitted that the Ld. PCIT had duly considered and dealt with the contentions raised Ld. PCIT had duly considered and dealt with the contentions raised Ld. PCIT had duly considered and dealt with the contentions raised by the assessee and had rightly concluded that the Assessing by the assessee and had rightly concluded that the Assessing by the assessee and had rightly concluded that the Assessing Officer failed to conduct necessary and proper inquiries on the conduct necessary and proper inquiries on the conduct necessary and proper inquiries on the issue in question. According to the Ld. DR, the order passed under issue in question. According to the Ld. DR, the order passed under issue in question. According to the Ld. DR, the order passed under section 263 of the Act does not call for any interference. section 263 of the Act does not call for any interference. section 263 of the Act does not call for any interference.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions and We have carefully considered the rival submissions and We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material ava perused the material available on ilable on record. The revisionary record. The revisionary jurisdiction in the present case has been exercised by the Ld. jurisdiction in the present case has been exercised by the Ld. jurisdiction in the present case has been exercised by the Ld. Principal Commissioner by invoking Explanation 2 to section 263 of Principal Commissioner by invoking Explanation 2 to section 263 of Principal Commissioner by invoking Explanation 2 to section 263 of the Act, which deems an assessment order to be erroneous in so far the Act, which deems an assessment order to be erroneous in so far the Act, which deems an assessment order to be erroneous in so far
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 as it is prejudicial to t as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue where the he interests of the Revenue where the Assessing Officer has failed to carry out such inquiries or Assessing Officer has failed to carry out such inquiries or Assessing Officer has failed to carry out such inquiries or verification as were warranted on the facts of the case. For ready verification as were warranted on the facts of the case. verification as were warranted on the facts of the case. reference said Explanation is reproduced as under: reference said Explanation is reproduced as under:
[Explanation 2.-For the purposes of this section, it is hereby declared that an order For the purposes of this section, it is hereby declared that an order For the purposes of this section, it is hereby declared that an order passed by the Assessing Officer passed by the Assessing Officer 52[or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] [or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, if, in the opinion of the Principal revenue, if, in the opinion of the Principal 53[Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner [Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal] Commissioner or Commissioner, or Principal] Commissioner or Commissioner,- (a) the order is passed without making inquir the order is passed without making inquiries or verification which ies or verification which should have been made should have been made 48; (b) the order is passed allowing any relief without inquiring into the claim; the order is passed allowing any relief without inquiring into the claim; the order is passed allowing any relief without inquiring into the claim; (c) the order has not been made in accordance with any order, direction or the order has not been made in accordance with any order, direction or the order has not been made in accordance with any order, direction or instruction issued by the Board under instruction issued by the Board under section 119; or (d) the order has not been passed in accordance with any decision which is the order has not been passed in accordance with any decision which is the order has not been passed in accordance with any decision which is prejudicial to the assessee, rendered by the jurisdictional High Court or the assessee, rendered by the jurisdictional High Court or the assessee, rendered by the jurisdictional High Court or Supreme Court in the case of the assessee or any other person.] Supreme Court in the case of the assessee or any other person.] Supreme Court in the case of the assessee or any other person.] 6.1 From a plain reading of Explanation 2, it is evident that the From a plain reading of Explanation 2, it is evident that the From a plain reading of Explanation 2, it is evident that the legislative intent is to treat an order as erroneous and prejudicial legislative intent is to treat an order as erroneous and prejudici legislative intent is to treat an order as erroneous and prejudici where there is a demonstrable absence of inquiry on material issues where there is a demonstrable absence of inquiry on material issues where there is a demonstrable absence of inquiry on material issues having a bearing on the determination of taxable income. The having a bearing on the determination of taxable income. The having a bearing on the determination of taxable income. The determinative question, therefore, is whether the Assessing Officer, determinative question, therefore, is whether the Assessing Officer, determinative question, therefore, is whether the Assessing Officer, in the present case, had conducted a meaningful and effective in the present case, had conducted a meaningful and eff in the present case, had conducted a meaningful and eff inquiry on the issues flagged by the Ld. PCIT, or whether the inquiry on the issues flagged by the Ld. PCIT, or whether the inquiry on the issues flagged by the Ld. PCIT, or whether the inquiry, if any, was merely perfunctory and ritualistic. inquiry, if any, was merely perfunctory and ritualistic. inquiry, if any, was merely perfunctory and ritualistic.
6.2 The Ld. PCIT noticed that while the assessee had disclosed The Ld. PCIT noticed that while the assessee had disclosed The Ld. PCIT noticed that while the assessee had disclosed revenue from operations amounting to ₹9,88,01,362/ revenue from operations amounting to 9,88,01,362/- in the profit and loss account, the balance sheet reflected an increase in trade nd loss account, the balance sheet reflected an increase in trade nd loss account, the balance sheet reflected an increase in trade receivables of ₹13,43,57,921/ 13,43,57,921/- during the relevant previous year. during the relevant previous year.
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 This substantial divergence, on the face of it, warranted deeper This substantial divergence, on the face of it, warranted deeper This substantial divergence, on the face of it, warranted deeper examination. The Ld. PCIT further observed that the notes to examination. The Ld. PCIT further observed that the notes t examination. The Ld. PCIT further observed that the notes t accounts did not clarify whether revenue had been recognised accounts did not clarify whether revenue had been recognised accounts did not clarify whether revenue had been recognised inclusive or exclusive of indirect taxes, thereby raising additional inclusive or exclusive of indirect taxes, thereby raising additional inclusive or exclusive of indirect taxes, thereby raising additional doubts regarding the correctness of revenue recognition. On doubts regarding the correctness of revenue recognition. On doubts regarding the correctness of revenue recognition. On examination of the assessment records, the Ld. PCIT concluded that examination of the assessment records, the Ld. PCIT concluded th examination of the assessment records, the Ld. PCIT concluded th the the the Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer had had had not not not undertaken undertaken undertaken any any any inquiry inquiry inquiry commensurate with the complexity and significance of these issues. commensurate with the complexity and significance of these issues. commensurate with the complexity and significance of these issues.
6.3 The Ld. PCIT referred to the decision of The Ld. PCIT referred to the decision of Kolkata Tribunal in the Kolkata Tribunal in the case of Subhlakshmi Vanijya (P.) Ltd. in Subhlakshmi Vanijya (P.) Ltd. in other connected other connected matters reported in matters reported in 172 TTJ 721 (Kol). The Ld. PCIT relying on The Ld. PCIT relying on the above decision, was of the view that though the Assessing was of the view that though the Assessing Officer has raised the query for collection of the Officer has raised the query for collection of the details of increase details of increase in trade receivables, but did not raise any in trade receivables, but did not raise any query for comparison of query for comparison of same with revenue from operation same with revenue from operation According to the Ld. PCIT in According to the Ld. PCIT in given circumstances, the Assessing Officer conducted half-baked given circumstances, the Assessing Officer conducted half given circumstances, the Assessing Officer conducted half inquiry ignoring vital aspects which he was required to examine. al aspects which he was required to examine. al aspects which he was required to examine. The difference in revenue from operations The difference in revenue from operations and increase in trade and increase in trade receivable should have receivable should have alerted the Assessing Officer for the Assessing Officer for further digging or unearthing or unearthing the transaction but he did not. the transaction but he did not.
6.4 Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has referred to Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has referred to Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has referred to Paper Book page 50 wherein the Assessing Officer has called for Paper Book page 50 wherein the Assessing Officer Paper Book page 50 wherein the Assessing Officer information of the party information of the party-wise details of the trade receivables. The wise details of the trade receivables. The relevant query raised by the Assessing Officer is extracted as under: relevant query raised by the Assessing Officer is extracted as under: relevant query raised by the Assessing Officer is extracted as under:
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. & 3522/MUM/2025
“16. Please Please provide provide the the party party-wise wise details details of of Trade Trade Receivable/sundry debtors shown in the ITR in the f Receivable/sundry debtors shown in the ITR in the following format: ollowing format: Sr. No. Name & PAN Whether Nature of Opening Add Amount Closing Present Related Receivabl Amount during the during the received Balance Address Party Y/N e (Rs.) year During the (Rs.) of the year Party 6.5 The reply filed by the assessee in The reply filed by the assessee in response to question No. 16 response to question No. 16 is available on Paper Book page 54. For ready reference, said reply is available on Paper Book page 54. For ready reference is available on Paper Book page 54. For ready reference is reproduced as under: is reproduced as under:
“16. Please find enclosed herewith the party wise Details of Trade Please find enclosed herewith the party wise Details of Trade Please find enclosed herewith the party wise Details of Trade Receivables/Sundry debtors as shown in the ITR (ANNEXURE Receivables/Sundry debtors as shown in the ITR (ANNEXURE Receivables/Sundry debtors as shown in the ITR (ANNEXURE - I)” 6.6 Copy of the Annexure opy of the Annexure-1 filed by the assessee is also 1 filed by the assessee is also reproduced as under: reproduced as under:
JMJ Ganpatji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt Ltd (Earlier known as Asrani Inns & Resorts Pvt Ltd) A.Y. 2015-16 Trade Receivable/Sundry Debtors Sr. No. Name & Present PAN Whether Nature of Receivable Opening Add during Add during Amount Closing Address of the Related Amount the Year the Year Received Balance (Rs.) Party Party (Rs.) During the (Y/N) Year 1 ACCENTURE AAACH3235M AAACH3235M NO Revenue from Hotel 805,855 5,017,668 5,017,668 4,458,016 1,365,507 SERVICES PVT. business LTD 2 ARANCA AAEC84802D AAEC84802D NO Revenue from Hotel 132,047 1,165,144 1,165,144 687,131 610,060 (MUMBAI) PVT business LTD 3 BERNHARD AAAE7346Q AAAE7346Q NO Revenue from Hotel - 122,868 122,868 67,556 55,312 SCHULTE SHIP business MANAGEMENT 4 CRISIL LIMITED AAACT3151E AAACT3151E NO Revenue from Hotel 538,780 4,383,777 4,383,777 4,518,866 403,691 business 5 CAPGEMINI AABCM4573E AABCM4573E NO Revenue from Hotel 183,263 2,308,855 2,308,855 1,966,522 525,596 TECHNOLOGY business SERVICES INDIA 6 CII NAOROJI AAATC0188R AAATC0188R NO Revenue from Hotel - 127,446 127,446 40,989 86,457 GODREJ business CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE 7 AVENUE AACCA8432H AACCA8432H NO Revenue from Hotel - 654,735 654,735 418,727 236,008 SUPERMARKETS business LTD
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 8 ECLERX AAAE7932L AAAE7932L NO Revenue from Hotel - 183,828 183,828 112,965 70,863 SERVICES LTD business 9 GENERAL MILLS AAACG1773B AAACG1773B NO Revenue from Hotel 330,883 638,202 638,202 806,578 162,507 INDIA PVT LTD business 10 GE OIL & GAS AAACD2199L AAACD2199L NO Revenue from Hotel - 198,536 198,536 0 198,536 INDIA PRIVATE business LIMITED 11 GODREJ & AAACG1395D AAACG1395D NO Revenue from Hotel 9,393 111,475 111,475 62,105 58,763 BOYCE business MANUFACTURIN G CO LTD 12 IIT BOMBAY AAATI1446A AAATI1446A NO Revenue from Hotel 45,408 2,294,155 2,294,155 1,658,455 681,108 business 13 MAERSK LINE AADCM7786M AADCM7786M NO Revenue from Hotel 156,876 5,137,443 5,137,443 4,593,439 700,880 FLEET MANG. & business TECH. INDIA 14 NETMAGIC IT AACCN2366D AACCN2366D NO Revenue from Hotel - 281,213 281,213 122,840 158,373 SERVICES business PRIVATE LIMITED 15 RAMESH AAACR6078E AAACR6078E YES Revenue from Hotel 121,925 26,119 26,119 0 148,044 HOTELS & business RESORTS PVT. LTD 16 SCHINDLER AAECS1548J AAECS1548J NO Revenue from Hotel 122,621 1,926,891 1,926,891 1,844,026 205,486 INDIA PVT. LTD business 17 THERMOFISHER AABCT3207A AABCT3207A NO Revenue from Hotel 75,583 2,091,688 2,091,688 2,093,929 73,342 SCIEN. INDIA P business LTD 18 WNS GLOBAL AAACW2598L AAACW2598L NO Revenue from Hotel 87,795 799,174 799,174 480,488 406,481 SERVICES PVT business LTD 19 WIPRO LIMITED AAACW0387R AAACW0387R NO Revenue from Hotel 49,563 465,840 465,840 385,993 129,410 business 20 OTHERS - NO Revenue from Hotel 1,007,451 12,307,148 12,307,148 12,468,255 836,381 DEBTOR business 10007451 14672807 6.7 It is true that the It is true that the Assessing Officer had called for party Assessing Officer had called for party-wise details of trade receivables, and the assessee had furnished such details of trade receivables, and the assessee had furnished such details of trade receivables, and the assessee had furnished such details. However, the mere calling for information does not, by itself, details. However, the mere calling for information does not, by itself, details. However, the mere calling for information does not, by itself, constitute an inquiry in the eyes of law. An inquiry necessarily constitute an inquiry in the eyes of law. An inquiry necessarily constitute an inquiry in the eyes of law. An inquiry necessarily postulates application of mind to the information gathered and s application of mind to the information gathered and s application of mind to the information gathered and examination of its implications for the computation of income. In examination of its implications for the computation of income. In examination of its implications for the computation of income. In the present case, the glaring mismatch between revenue from the present case, the glaring mismatch between revenue from the present case, the glaring mismatch between revenue from operations and the increase in trade receivables, should have operations and the increase in trade receivables, operations and the increase in trade receivables, alerted him, but the Assessing Officer did not examine the the Assessing Officer did not examine the the Assessing Officer did not examine the JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 correlation between the two, nor did he seek any explanation correlation between the two, nor did he seek any explanation correlation between the two, nor did he seek any explanation reconciling reconciling reconciling the the the difference. difference. difference. The The The information information information obtained obtained obtained was was was mechanically placed on record without being taken to its logical mechanically placed on record without being taken to its logical mechanically placed on record without being taken to its logical conclusion. The less revenue he less revenue reported for the purpose of income reported for the purpose of income-tax as compared to increase in trade receivables as compared to increase in trade receivables should have should have opened his eyes for further look into the matter for further look into the matter. But the Assessing Officer . But the Assessing Officer did not carry out any inquiry except placing did not carry out any inquiry except placing that information on the information on the file.
6.8 The Assessing Officer functions not only as an adjudicator but The Assessing Officer functions not only as an adjudicator but The Assessing Officer functions not only as an adjudicator but also as a fact-finding authority finding authority and so he was required to bring the and so he was required to bring the material collected to its logical end. material collected to its logical end. Where the facts on record raise Where the facts on record raise an apparent anomaly having a direct nexus with taxable income, an apparent anomaly having a direct nexus with taxable income, an apparent anomaly having a direct nexus with taxable income, the Assessing Officer is duty the Assessing Officer is duty-bound to probe the matter further. bound to probe the matter further. Evidently in the case of assessee, increase in debtors was connected Evidently in the case of assessee, increase in debtors was connected Evidently in the case of assessee, increase in debtors was connected and interlinked with revenu and interlinked with revenue from operation, but remained silent e from operation, but remained silent after placing the details of trade receivables on file. The failure to after placing the details of trade receivables on file. after placing the details of trade receivables on file. do so, particularly when the issue goes to the root of income do so, particularly when the issue goes to the root of income do so, particularly when the issue goes to the root of income recognition, renders the assessment vulnerable under Explanation recognition, renders the assessment vulnerable under Explanation recognition, renders the assessment vulnerable under Explanation 2 to section 263. We, therefore, find no merit in the contention of e, therefore, find no merit in the contention of e, therefore, find no merit in the contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer had carried out adequate the assessee that the Assessing Officer had carried out adequate the assessee that the Assessing Officer had carried out adequate inquiry on this issue. inquiry on this issue.
6.9 The further contention of the assessee that the year under The further contention of the assessee that the year under The further contention of the assessee that the year under consideration being an unabated assessment year, no inquiry or consideration being an unabated assessment year, no inq consideration being an unabated assessment year, no inq addition could be made in the absence of incriminating material, is addition could be made in the absence of incriminating material, is addition could be made in the absence of incriminating material, is JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. & 3522/MUM/2025 also devoid of substance in the facts of the present case. The Ld. also devoid of substance in the facts of the present case. The Ld. also devoid of substance in the facts of the present case. The Ld. PCIT has noted that substantial material was seized during the PCIT has noted that substantial material was seized during the PCIT has noted that substantial material was seized during the course of the search, and the Assessing Officer ha course of the search, and the Assessing Officer had, in fact, called d, in fact, called upon the assessee to explain the seized material by issuing a upon the assessee to explain the seized material by issuing a upon the assessee to explain the seized material by issuing a specific query under section 142(1) of the Act a specific query under section 142(1) of the Act as under s under:
“6-A. Detailed page A. Detailed page-wise explanation on the documents, books wise explanation on the documents, books etc. found, inventoried and impounded during the course o etc. found, inventoried and impounded during the course o etc. found, inventoried and impounded during the course of survey/ seized during the search proceedings, and reconcile survey/ seized during the search proceedings, and reconcile survey/ seized during the search proceedings, and reconcile the transactions and contents therein with reference to the the transactions and contents therein with reference to the the transactions and contents therein with reference to the statements recorded and return filed and income disclosed. statements recorded and return filed and income disclosed. statements recorded and return filed and income disclosed.” 6.10 The assessee, however, merely stated that explanations had The assessee, however, merely stated that explanations had The assessee, however, merely stated that explanations had been been furnished furnished during during post-search post search proceedings proceedings before before the the Investigation Wing and did not place any such explanation before Investigation Wing and did not place any such explanation before Investigation Wing and did not place any such explanation before the Assessing Officer. the Assessing Officer. The relevant reply is reproduced as under: The relevant reply is reproduced as under:
“6A The explanation to the seized documents is submitted xplanation to the seized documents is submitted xplanation to the seized documents is submitted during the post search proceedings you are requested to during the post search proceedings you are requested to during the post search proceedings you are requested to kindly refer the same kindly refer the same.” 6.11 From above submission of assessee, it can be inferred that the From above submission of assessee, it can be inferred that the From above submission of assessee, it can be inferred that the assessee is referring to submission filed before the investigation assessee is referring to submission filed before the investi assessee is referring to submission filed before the investi wing in post search proceeding and no submission had been filed wing in post search proceeding and no submission had been filed wing in post search proceeding and no submission had been filed before the ld AO explaining existence of incrimination material qua before the ld AO explaining existence of incrimination material qua before the ld AO explaining existence of incrimination material qua the year under consideration. the year under consideration. Thus, the Assessing Officer accepted Thus, the Assessing Officer accepted the returned loss without examining whether any incriminating the returned loss without examining whether any i the returned loss without examining whether any i material pertaining to the year under consideration existed or had material pertaining to the year under consideration existed or had material pertaining to the year under consideration existed or had any bearing on the assessment. This omission constitutes a clear any bearing on the assessment. This omission constitutes a clear any bearing on the assessment. This omission constitutes a clear failure to exercise jurisdiction vested in him under section 153A of failure to exercise jurisdiction vested in him under section 153A of failure to exercise jurisdiction vested in him under section 153A of the Act. At the stage of revision, it is n the Act. At the stage of revision, it is neither required nor either required nor
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 permissible to conclusively determine the existence or otherwise of permissible to conclusively determine the existence or otherwise of permissible to conclusively determine the existence or otherwise of incriminating material. What is material is whether the Assessing incriminating material. What is material is whether the Assessing incriminating material. What is material is whether the Assessing Officer examined the issue at all. In the present case, the Officer examined the issue at all. In the pres Officer examined the issue at all. In the pres assessment was carried out as a consequenc assessment was carried out as a consequence of search and the ld e of search and the ld AO was mandatorily required to examine the seized documents and AO was mandatorily required to examine the seized documents and AO was mandatorily required to examine the seized documents and other material or assets seized, but he admittedly did not. Thus, it other material or assets seized, but he admittedly did not. Thus, it other material or assets seized, but he admittedly did not. Thus, it is specific violation of the Explanation is specific violation of the Explanation- =2 below section 263 =2 below section 263 that the order is passed without maki the order is passed without making enquires or verification which ng enquires or verification which should have been made. should have been made. The Ld. DR specifically pointed out that in The Ld. DR specifically pointed out that in view of no inquiries on the issue of the existence of the view of no inquiries on the issue of the existence of the view of no inquiries on the issue of the existence of the incriminating material also the assessment order is liable to be hold incriminating material also the assessment order is liable to be hold incriminating material also the assessment order is liable to be hold as erroneous in so far as p as erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the R udicial to the interest of the Revenue. Such objection raised before the Ld. PCIT has als Such objection raised before the Ld. PCIT has also been rejected by o been rejected by the Ld. PCIT, observing as under: the Ld. PCIT, observing as under:
“7. In response to the notices above, the assessee has made 7. In response to the notices above, the assessee has made 7. In response to the notices above, the assessee has made submissions on 07.03.2025. The submissions of the submissions on 07.03.2025. The submissions of the assessee assessee have been perused and are available on record. The assessee have been perused and are available on record. The assessee have been perused and are available on record. The assessee has made the following argumentsin his submissions in has made the following argumentsin his submissions in has made the following argumentsin his submissions in support of his position in response to which the comments of support of his position in response to which the comments of support of his position in response to which the comments of this office are provided after each such argument. this office are provided after each such argument.
(a) The Assessing Of (a) The Assessing Officer had not, either during the ficer had not, either during the assessment proceeding or in physical verification during assessment proceeding or in physical verification during assessment proceeding or in physical verification during Search, found any fault in the said claim made by assesse Search, found any fault in the said claim made by assesse Search, found any fault in the said claim made by assesse and had raised specific queries in respect of the impugned and had raised specific queries in respect of the impugned and had raised specific queries in respect of the impugned matters involving the revenue accruals. It is the matters involving the revenue accruals. It is the very argument very argument that the Assessing Officer has missed out on, omitted to that the Assessing Officer has missed out on, omitted to that the Assessing Officer has missed out on, omitted to observe/examine/verify and therefore erred in the impugned observe/examine/verify and therefore erred in the impugned observe/examine/verify and therefore erred in the impugned matter that is the critical factual and statutory element in this matter that is the critical factual and statutory element in this matter that is the critical factual and statutory element in this case. Thus is precisely the reason why the revisionary case. Thus is precisely the reason why the revisionary case. Thus is precisely the reason why the revisionary proceedings are being carried out and what gives this office eedings are being carried out and what gives this office eedings are being carried out and what gives this office the authority and jurisdiction to do so. the authority and jurisdiction to do so.
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. & 3522/MUM/2025
(b) The assessee in his proposition 1 has cited the recent (b) The assessee in his proposition 1 has cited the recent (b) The assessee in his proposition 1 has cited the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of AbhisarBuildwell (P) Ltd. and certain other ju AbhisarBuildwell (P) Ltd. and certain other judicial ratios to dicial ratios to argue that if no incriminating material found during the course argue that if no incriminating material found during the course argue that if no incriminating material found during the course of Search u/s 132 of the Act was present on record, then any of Search u/s 132 of the Act was present on record, then any of Search u/s 132 of the Act was present on record, then any completed/unabated assessments could not be carried out completed/unabated assessments could not be carried out completed/unabated assessments could not be carried out and completed by the Assessing Officer in manners that and completed by the Assessing Officer in manners that and completed by the Assessing Officer in manners that included luded luded enhancements enhancements enhancements to to to income income income based based based on on on other other other material/information. material/information. (c) In response to this, it is first important to recognize that, the (c) In response to this, it is first important to recognize that, the (c) In response to this, it is first important to recognize that, the impugned matters involved and being discussed here pertain impugned matters involved and being discussed here pertain impugned matters involved and being discussed here pertain to glaring deficiencies, inadequacies and inconsistencies to glaring deficiencies, inadequacies and inconsistencies to glaring deficiencies, inadequacies and inconsistencies clearly present in the assessee's records, including its books of arly present in the assessee's records, including its books of arly present in the assessee's records, including its books of statements and supporting documents statements and supporting documents (d) The search and seizure action was carried out on all (d) The search and seizure action was carried out on all (d) The search and seizure action was carried out on all matters impacting the assessee's business and accounting matters impacting the assessee's business and accounting matters impacting the assessee's business and accounting operations, and there is nothing available operations, and there is nothing available on record at this on record at this time to show or prove that no incriminating material or time to show or prove that no incriminating material or time to show or prove that no incriminating material or information relating to the above impugned matters were information relating to the above impugned matters were information relating to the above impugned matters were available in the likely voluminous material discovered and available in the likely voluminous material discovered and available in the likely voluminous material discovered and seized during the search. Without doubt, the action of a search seized during the search. Without doubt, the action of a search seized during the search. Without doubt, the action of a search statutorily permits the Department to examine relevant matters tutorily permits the Department to examine relevant matters tutorily permits the Department to examine relevant matters for the preceding 10 years based on the items seized and for the preceding 10 years based on the items seized and for the preceding 10 years based on the items seized and other discoveries made and material/information unearthed other discoveries made and material/information unearthed other discoveries made and material/information unearthed during such search action. This was the reason why the during such search action. This was the reason why the during such search action. This was the reason why the proceedings for the impugn proceedings for the impugned A.Y. 2012-13 were reopened. 13 were reopened. Therefore, it cannot be prima facie held at this time based on Therefore, it cannot be prima facie held at this time based on Therefore, it cannot be prima facie held at this time based on the unqualified word of the assessee alone that any the unqualified word of the assessee alone that any the unqualified word of the assessee alone that any incriminating material unearthed during the search relating to incriminating material unearthed during the search relating to incriminating material unearthed during the search relating to the impugned matters are not present and availa the impugned matters are not present and available on record. ble on record. The investigating officer in the Wing while examining the The investigating officer in the Wing while examining the The investigating officer in the Wing while examining the materials seized and available following the search action and materials seized and available following the search action and materials seized and available following the search action and theearlier Assessing Officer while passingthe impugned order theearlier Assessing Officer while passingthe impugned order theearlier Assessing Officer while passingthe impugned order of assessment has likely not appreciated or correctly of assessment has likely not appreciated or correctly of assessment has likely not appreciated or correctly comprehended or cognized the true meaning of such relevant ehended or cognized the true meaning of such relevant ehended or cognized the true meaning of such relevant incriminating material that was available on record. This incriminating material that was available on record. This incriminating material that was available on record. This opportunity to correctly appreciate, discern and arrive at opportunity to correctly appreciate, discern and arrive at opportunity to correctly appreciate, discern and arrive at proper and reasoned findings of assessable incomes is now proper and reasoned findings of assessable incomes is now proper and reasoned findings of assessable incomes is now sought to be provided to th sought to be provided to the Assessing Officer through these e Assessing Officer through these revisionary proceedings. revisionary proceedings. (e) Further, the judicial ratios cited by the assessee need to be (e) Further, the judicial ratios cited by the assessee need to be (e) Further, the judicial ratios cited by the assessee need to be examined against the position that the original order of examined against the position that the original order of examined against the position that the original order of assessment that has been completed under Section 153A r.w.s assessment that has been completed under Section 153A r.w.s assessment that has been completed under Section 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the 143(3) of the Act has likely been passed by the Assessing Act has likely been passed by the Assessing
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. & 3522/MUM/2025
Officer after not properly recognizing, appreciating, examining, Officer after not properly recognizing, appreciating, examining, Officer after not properly recognizing, appreciating, examining, inquiring into or verifying the incriminating material. inquiring into or verifying the incriminating material. Needless Needless to say, the material and information that are being examined to say, the material and information that are being examined to say, the material and information that are being examined here now has been ext here now has been extracted from the record and based on the racted from the record and based on the discussions above, there is nothing to hold that this material or discussions above, there is nothing to hold that this material or discussions above, there is nothing to hold that this material or information are entirely unrelated to the discoveries made information are entirely unrelated to the discoveries made information are entirely unrelated to the discoveries made during the search and the incriminating material so discovered during the search and the incriminating material so discovered during the search and the incriminating material so discovered or unearthed. A categorical or unearthed. A categorical determination in the matter is to be determination in the matter is to be made by the Assessing Officer in the fresh assessment made by the Assessing Officer in the fresh assessment made by the Assessing Officer in the fresh assessment proceedings now to be carried out and completed. If such proceedings now to be carried out and completed. If such proceedings now to be carried out and completed. If such incriminating material unearthed during the search that incriminating material unearthed during the search that incriminating material unearthed during the search that involve the impugned matter in dispute is found to b involve the impugned matter in dispute is found to be entirely e entirely absent on record, the Assessing Officer is free to draw his absent on record, the Assessing Officer is free to draw his absent on record, the Assessing Officer is free to draw his conclusions to assess or not assess the impugned amount. conclusions to assess or not assess the impugned amount. conclusions to assess or not assess the impugned amount. Preventing such inquiry, verification and examination after Preventing such inquiry, verification and examination after Preventing such inquiry, verification and examination after necessary due diligent application of mind by the AO amounts necessary due diligent application of mind by the AO amounts necessary due diligent application of mind by the AO amounts to thwarting the intent and purpose of law and enabling the rting the intent and purpose of law and enabling the rting the intent and purpose of law and enabling the non-assessment of likely assessable incomes. This would assessment of likely assessable incomes. This would assessment of likely assessable incomes. This would result in an error in law and would be premature to conclude result in an error in law and would be premature to conclude result in an error in law and would be premature to conclude at this time. Therefore, revision u/s 263 of the Act which at this time. Therefore, revision u/s 263 of the Act which at this time. Therefore, revision u/s 263 of the Act which orders that examinations of orders that examinations of the relevant matters be carried out the relevant matters be carried out as legally envisaged and statutorily provided to arrive at the as legally envisaged and statutorily provided to arrive at the as legally envisaged and statutorily provided to arrive at the proper and correct quantum of income, is being carried out. proper and correct quantum of income, is being carried out. proper and correct quantum of income, is being carried out. The assessee can have no argument with this. The judicial The assessee can have no argument with this. The judicial The assessee can have no argument with this. The judicial ratios cited therefore at this time ap ratios cited therefore at this time appear to have no pear to have no applicability to the facts of this case, particularly because it is applicability to the facts of this case, particularly because it is applicability to the facts of this case, particularly because it is much too summary and premature to conclude at this time that much too summary and premature to conclude at this time that much too summary and premature to conclude at this time that additional incomes will necessarily be assessed following this additional incomes will necessarily be assessed following this additional incomes will necessarily be assessed following this order u/s 263 of the Act. Further, the Assessing order u/s 263 of the Act. Further, the Assessing Officer shall Officer shall ensure in his inquiries and verifications carried out during the ensure in his inquiries and verifications carried out during the ensure in his inquiries and verifications carried out during the assessment proceedings and in the passing of the order of assessment proceedings and in the passing of the order of assessment proceedings and in the passing of the order of assessment that all binding judicial ratios of the Hon'ble assessment that all binding judicial ratios of the Hon'ble assessment that all binding judicial ratios of the Hon'ble Courts are scrupulously followed and applied. Needless to Courts are scrupulously followed and applied. Needless to Courts are scrupulously followed and applied. Needless to say, if the binding ratios are so applicable there would be no ay, if the binding ratios are so applicable there would be no ay, if the binding ratios are so applicable there would be no case of assessment of any impugned amount emerging out of case of assessment of any impugned amount emerging out of case of assessment of any impugned amount emerging out of the discussion above. the discussion above.” 6.12 The reliance placed by the assessee on the decision of the The reliance placed by the assessee on the decision of the The reliance placed by the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwel PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. is misplaced. The said decision does not insulate an assessment order misplaced. The said decision does not insulate an assessment order misplaced. The said decision does not insulate an assessment order from revision under section 263 where the Assessing Officer has from revision under section 263 where the Assessing Officer has from revision under section 263 where the Assessing Officer has failed to conduct the basic inquiries necessary to ascertain whether failed to conduct the basic inquiries necessary to ascertain whether failed to conduct the basic inquiries necessary to ascertain whether
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 incriminating material exists and how it incriminating material exists and how it impacts the assessment. impacts the assessment. The revisionary order merely restores the matter to the Assessing The revisionary order merely restores the matter to the Assessing The revisionary order merely restores the matter to the Assessing Officer for proper examination in accordance with law and does not, Officer for proper examination in accordance with law and does not, Officer for proper examination in accordance with law and does not, by itself, result in any addition. by itself, result in any addition. Therefore, the proceedings u/s 263 Therefore, the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act cannot be set asi of the Act cannot be set aside on the arguments of th de on the arguments of the assessee that their exists no incriminating material qua the assessment year no incriminating material qua the assessment year no incriminating material qua the assessment year under consideration. .
6.13 The Ld. PCIT has consciously refrained from adjudicating The Ld. PCIT has consciously refrained from adjudicating The Ld. PCIT has consciously refrained from adjudicating upon the merits of the issue and has only directed the Assessing upon the merits of the issue and has only directed the Assessing upon the merits of the issue and has only directed the Assessing Officer to conduct necessary inquiries and pass a fresh assessment ficer to conduct necessary inquiries and pass a fresh assessment ficer to conduct necessary inquiries and pass a fresh assessment order after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. order after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. order after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Such an approach is fully consistent with the scope and object of Such an approach is fully consistent with the scope and object of Such an approach is fully consistent with the scope and object of section 263 of the Act. section 263 of the Act. The Ld. PCIT concluded the proc The Ld. PCIT concluded the proceeding observing as under:
“14. Considering the positions of law and various judicial 14. Considering the positions of law and various judicial 14. Considering the positions of law and various judicial pronouncements, I hold that the assessment order passed by pronouncements, I hold that the assessment order passed by pronouncements, I hold that the assessment order passed by the assessing officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the the assessing officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the the assessing officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue within the meaning of Section 26 interests of Revenue within the meaning of Section 26 interests of Revenue within the meaning of Section 263 of the Act. The impugned facts and particulars applicable in the Act. The impugned facts and particulars applicable in the Act. The impugned facts and particulars applicable in the impugned matters as discussed in detail earlier in this order impugned matters as discussed in detail earlier in this order impugned matters as discussed in detail earlier in this order have not been correctly and comprehensively examined by the have not been correctly and comprehensively examined by the have not been correctly and comprehensively examined by the Assessing Officer per the applicable statutory mandates. As Assessing Officer per the applicable statutory mandates. As Assessing Officer per the applicable statutory mandates. As detailed d d and and and evidenced evidenced evidenced above, above, above, inquiries, inquiries, inquiries, verifications, verifications, verifications, analyses, and investigations that were required to be carried analyses, and investigations that were required to be carried analyses, and investigations that were required to be carried out by the Assessing Officer have not been carried out in the out by the Assessing Officer have not been carried out in the out by the Assessing Officer have not been carried out in the manners these were to be carried out in the matter of manners these were to be carried out in the matter of manners these were to be carried out in the matter of reconciling the difference of reconciling the difference of Rs 3,55,56,559/- between the between the operating revenue and the trade receivables (sundry debtors) operating revenue and the trade receivables (sundry debtors) operating revenue and the trade receivables (sundry debtors) thereby attracting squarely the applicability of Explanation 2 thereby attracting squarely the applicability of Explanation 2 thereby attracting squarely the applicability of Explanation 2 of Section 263 of the Act. All of the other issues stated in of Section 263 of the Act. All of the other issues stated in of Section 263 of the Act. All of the other issues stated in paragraph 3 of this order that include th paragraph 3 of this order that include the examination of the e examination of the inclusion/exclusion of taxes, of the treatment of indirect taxes inclusion/exclusion of taxes, of the treatment of indirect taxes inclusion/exclusion of taxes, of the treatment of indirect taxes
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
& 3522/MUM/2025 and of the utilisationagainst the CENVAT credit will need to be and of the utilisationagainst the CENVAT credit will need to be and of the utilisationagainst the CENVAT credit will need to be factored in while carrying out and completing the assessment. factored in while carrying out and completing the assessment. factored in while carrying out and completing the assessment. I therefore, set aside the assessment order I therefore, set aside the assessment order passed to the passed to the Assessing Officer, with a direction to carry out and complete Assessing Officer, with a direction to carry out and complete Assessing Officer, with a direction to carry out and complete the assessment afresh, after conducting necessary enquiries the assessment afresh, after conducting necessary enquiries the assessment afresh, after conducting necessary enquiries as directed above in respect of the impugned matters including as directed above in respect of the impugned matters including as directed above in respect of the impugned matters including that of the underassessment for the AY 2012 that of the underassessment for the AY 2012-13. The 13. The Assessing Officer is directed to take necessary actions sing Officer is directed to take necessary actions sing Officer is directed to take necessary actions including the passing of the order of assessment after including the passing of the order of assessment after including the passing of the order of assessment after affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 6.14 In view of the foregoing discussion, we find no infirmity in the In view of the foregoing discussion, we find no infirmity in the In view of the foregoing discussion, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner under section 263 order passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner under section 263 order passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner under section 263 of the Act. The assessment order was rightly held to be erroneous in of the Act. The assessment order was rightly held to be erroneous in of the Act. The assessment order was rightly held to be erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. so far as it was prejudicial to the interests of the Reve so far as it was prejudicial to the interests of the Reve Accordingly, the impugned order is upheld and the grounds of Accordingly, the impugned order is upheld and the grounds of Accordingly, the impugned order is upheld and the grounds of appeal of the assessee are dismissed. appeal of the assessee are dismissed.
7. We now take up the appeal of the assessee for the assessment We now take up the appeal of the assessee for the assessment We now take up the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2015–16. The grounds raised in this appeal and the order
16. The grounds raised in this appeal and the order
16. The grounds raised in this appeal and the order passed by the Ld. Princi passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income pal Commissioner of Income-tax are identical in nature to those considered by us for the assessment identical in nature to those considered by us for the assessment identical in nature to those considered by us for the assessment year 2012–13, except for the variation in the quantum involved. 13, except for the variation in the quantum involved. 13, except for the variation in the quantum involved. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded and the findings given by us Accordingly, for the reasons recorded and the findings given by us Accordingly, for the reasons recorded and the findings given by us while disposing of the ap while disposing of the appeal for the assessment year 2012 peal for the assessment year 2012–13, which apply mutatis mutandis to the present year, the grounds which apply mutatis mutandis to the present year, the grounds which apply mutatis mutandis to the present year, the grounds raised by the assessee for the assessment year 2015–16 are also raised by the assessee for the assessment year 2015 raised by the assessee for the assessment year 2015 dismissed.
JMJ Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Ganpatiji Maharaja Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. & 3522/MUM/2025
In the result, both the appeal In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. of the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on ounced in the open Court on 20/01/2026. /01/2026.