IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Assessment Year :2020-21 Rohan Landscape Vs. The Principal Private Limited Commissioner of 11^th Floor, Tower 2A Income Tax, Mumbai-8 One World Center Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 013 PAN/GIR No.AAECR5961N (Appellant) .. (Respondent Assessee by Shri Dhanesh Bafna; Shri Hardik Nirmal & Ms.Hinal Shah Revenue by Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT DR Date of Hearing 17/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 10 /02/2026 / O R D E R आदेश PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M):

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 21/03/2025 passed by PCIT, Mumbai – 8 in revisionary jurisdiction u/s.263 for the A.Y.2020-21.

2. The assessee, Rohan Landscape Private Limited, is a company engaged in the business of developing, operating and leasing modern industrial real estate and logistics and warehousing facilities. Its business model, as consistently explained on record, involves acquisition of land, development and construction of warehousing infrastructure, completion of projects, and thereafter monetisation through long-term lease arrangements. During the previous year relevant to assessment year 2020-21, the assessee completed development of one of its warehousing facilities situated at Pune and also entered into long-term lease arrangements in respect of the said facility. It was further explained that the nature of the business necessarily involves long gestation periods and that the timing of accrual of rental income does not always coincide with the year in which substantial business activities are undertaken.

3. During the same period, Rohan Housing Schemes Private Limited stood amalgamated with the assessee pursuant to an order of the National Company Law Tribunal, with the appointed date being 1 April 2019. This amalgamation was duly disclosed in the audited financial statements, notes to accounts and accompanying schedules. The assessee placed on record the NCLT order, the scheme of amalgamation and the accounting treatment adopted pursuant thereto. These facts were brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings and formed part of the assessment record.

4. For the assessment year under consideration, the assessee filed its original return of income under section 139(1) on 15 February 2021 and thereafter a revised return under section

139(5) on 31 March 2021 declaring a loss of ₹7,68,01,982. Along with the computation of income, the assessee appended explanatory notes, wherein it was categorically stated that the business of the assessee had been set up with effect from 1 April 2019. This note was relied upon by the assessee to demonstrate that all expenditure incurred during the relevant year was post setting-up of business. The return was accompanied by audited financial statements, schedules, depreciation workings, details of capital work-in-progress, and notes explaining the accounting and tax treatment adopted.

5. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny. The notice issued under section 143(2) specifically recorded the reasons for selection, namely high creditors and liabilities, substantial investment by an unlisted company, business loss, and amalgamation. It was thus evident from the outset that the scrutiny proceedings were wide-ranging and not confined to a limited or isolated issue. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notices under section 142(1) calling upon the assessee to furnish, inter alia, details of the nature of business activities carried out during the year, audited financial statements, computation of income, details of expenses claimed, loans and finance costs, justification for high liabilities vis-à-vis income, details of sundry creditors, and particulars relating to amalgamation.

6. In response to the notices, the assessee furnished detailed written submissions supported by docume