TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 1150
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he parties that all the captioned appeals are on identical issues, having similar as well as interconnected facts and circumstances, and directed against the identical orders U/s 263 by the Ld. PCIT(Central), Mumbai, therefore may be taken together for hearing. The matters accordingly are heard together and disposed of under this common order. 3. For the sake of brevity and convenience ITA No. 3713/Mum/2025 for the A.Y. 2011-12 has been taken as lead case, wherein our observation, discussion and decision shall apply mutatis mutandis to the remaining appeals under consideration. 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA 3713/Mum/2025, which are identical in all the aforesaid appeals: 1. On the facts & in the circumstances of the case the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Mumbai-1 has erred legally & factually by passing order u/s 263 for fresh assessment where the order passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) was not at all prejudicial for revenue. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of case the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Mumbai-1 has further erred in passing order u/s 263 when the order passed u/s 153A r.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee. The judicial ratio in the order of ITAT in the assessee's case for AY 2014-15 was given on different set of facts and legal position therefore could not be applied for rest of the years. The assessee has provided the list of documents submitted to the department in support of its case that purportedly shows that the products and operations have completely compliant with mandate u/s 80IC of the Act. The Assessee also cited the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT, Central-3 Vs Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd., reported in (2023) 149 taxmann.com 399 and certain other judicial ratios to argue that if no incrementing material was found in the course of search u/s. 132 of the Act, then the assessment of any completed/unabated assessment year could not be carried out and completed by the assessing officer in manner that leads to enhancements to income based on other material / information. 7. Ld. PCIT referred to the replies to the assessee however was not convinced with the same, thus, had concluded that as per mandate of explanation-2 below subsection (1) of sub-section 263 (inserted by finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015), the requisite enquiries were not m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... after duly considering the details filed. Ld. AO, after discussion with Ld. JCIT from time to time has passed the order u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) as approved u/s 153D of the Act, accepting the claim qua the deduction u/s. 80IC of the Act. It is submitted that ld. PCIT doubted the claim of the assessee u/s 80IC, having an opinion that the assessee was not producing the goods specified in the 14th schedule of IT Act and accordingly have issued the show caused regarding the assessee entitlement u/s. 80IC(2)(a)(ii) and also whether the product manufactured was covered u/s. 80IC(2)(b). A detailed reply was furnished by the assessee before the Ld. PCIT to clarify its position that no incrementing material was found in the course of search nor in show caused notice the Ld. PCIT was relying on any incrementing material to carry out the revisionary proceeding under section 263 of the Act. The assessee also clarified about the place, where manufacturing activity was carried and same is covered in the CBDT notification no. S.O.1269 (E) dated 04.11.2003. The address is further certified being stated in the punchanama therefore the assessee appellant was eligible for the deduction u/s. 80IC(2)(a)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uired during the course of hearing before the Ld. AO and clarified the issue before the Ld. PCIT also during the proceeding u/s 263 of the Act. It is submitted that one's the assessing officer has accepted the replies of the assessee and has passed an order, it cannot be the case of no enquiry. Since the PCIT while passing the order u/s. 263 of the Act has failed to give any decision/conclusion on merits, the order u/s. 263 of the Act is bad in law. Reliance is placed on the judgement PCIT vs. V-con Integrated Solutions 476 ITR 526 (SC) dated 04/04/2025. Regarding addition on the basis of statements any incriminating material which is relied upon the Ld. DR of Mr. Nari Behara during the course of search. Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of the Ld. DCIT vs. Aachman Vaijya (P) Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) ITA NO. 824 to 827/Mum/2025 dated 21/03/2025 [2025] 173 taxmann.com 391 and submitted that no addition can be made based on the statements, without any incriminating material found during the course of search. 13. Ld. AR further clarified regarding no specific mention about the issue in the assessment order that merely because Ld. AO did not make any mention of the issue in respect o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the referred years and Ld. PCIT was not justified in revising the assessment for such years. 17. On merits of the case the assessee submits that the assessee manufactures essential oils and perfumery which is not covered in the negative list as per 13th Schedule of the Act, whereas it is producing the goods specified in the 14th schedule of IT Act. Further the place of manufacture i.e. the address has been confirmed from the panchanama itself. Since the appellant had satisfied all the pre-conditions, the appellant is eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC(2)(a)(ii) of the Act. Also, since the appellant is manufacturing essential oils and perfumery which is made from processing aromatic herbs the appellant is even eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC(2)(b)(ii) of the Act. 18. With the aforesaid submission it was prayed by Ld. AR that the order u/s 263 based on improper application of the facts and under misreading of the legal provision of the act cannot sustain in the eyes of the law, the same therefore is liable to be quashed. 19. Per contra Ld. CIT-DR representing the revenue submitted that as per assessment order the activity of the assessee was manufacturing of Gutka and Tobacco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee and find that the assessee is not entitled to claim deduction u/s 80IC of the Act which has been claimed by the assessee for assessment years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2015- 16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19. Under such observations, Ld. PCIT invoked the provisions of Section 263 to revise the assessment made u/s 153A / 143(3) of the Act for all the aforesaid years. Show cause notices were issued to the assessee u/s 263 of the Act to which the assessee responded with necessary compliances and have objected to the revisionary proceedings initiate, as elaborated hereinabove. Ld. PCIT did not find any substance in the submissions of assessee and therefore, had set aside the assessment to the file of Ld. AO to complete the assessment afresh after conducting necessary enquiries as directed in the order u/s 263 of the Act. It was the conviction of Ld. PCIT that the assessment order passed by Ld. AO are erroneous / prejudicial to the interest of revenue therefor, the said assessment needs to be set aside and fresh assessment should be made, examining the issue pertaining to assessee's claim u/s 80IC of the Act. 21. Before us, Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee has raised multifold....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessments shall stand abated; (iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating material unearthed during the search and the other material available with the AO including the income declared in the returns; and (iv) in case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. The question involved in the present set of appeals and review petit....