2022 (1) TMI 1160 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of assessment u/s 144C - Non considering objections to the draft assessment order - non adherence to mandatory provisions of Section 144C - Order passed without awaiting directions from the DRP, before whom the matter was pending - HELD THAT - Undisputed material on record clearly indicates that in response to the draft Assessment Order issued to the petitioner, petitioner submitted objections before the DRP within the prescribed period and intimated the same to the Assessing Officer pursuant to clarification sought for by the Assessing Officer the explanation offered by the petitioner as regards his inability and omission to file objections with the Assessing Officer earlier in addition to the DRP merits acceptance, particularly in view of the Government Orders, circulars etc. as well as the orders of the Apex Courts extending the period of limitation coupled with the intimation provided by the petitioner to the Assessing Officer as sought for by him prior to passing the Assessment Order. At any rate, the petitioner had chosen to exercise the option of filing objections to the draft Assessment Order warranting the DRP to proceed further before the Assessing Officer takes further steps as provided under sub-sections 5 to 13 to Section 144C.. The impugned Assessment Order passed by respondent No.1- Assessing Officer without awaiting directions from the DRP, before whom the matter was pending pursuant to the petitioner filing his objections within the prescribed period is clearly arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction or authority of law and the same deserves to be quashed and necessary directions are to be issued to the DRP as well as the Assessing Officer in this regard.

Summary

Issues:
Quashing of final assessment order, demand notice, and other reliefs sought by the petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought the quashing of the final assessment order, demand notice, and related notices. The petitioner had the option to file objections after receiving the draft Assessment Order, which was duly exercised by submitting objections to the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) within the prescribed period. Despite the petitioner's timely submission of objections and communication with the Assessing Officer regarding the same, the Assessment Order was passed without awaiting directions from the DRP. The petitioner argued that due to the shift to the faceless scheme and the Covid-19 pandemic, any omission in filing objections should be condoned. The petitioner contended that the Assessment Order was in violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 144C of the Income Tax Act.

The respondent, on the other hand, argued that there was no merit in the petition and it should be dismissed. However, the court found merit in the petitioner's contentions. It was observed that the petitioner had submitted objections within the prescribed period and had intimated the Assessing Officer accordingly. The court accepted the petitioner's explanation for any delay in filing objections, considering the extenuating circumstances and legal extensions of limitation periods. The court held that the Assessment Order passed without waiting for DRP directions was arbitrary, illegal, and lacked jurisdiction. Consequently, the court decided to quash the Assessment Order and issued directions to the DRP and the Assessing Officer to proceed in accordance with the law.

In the final order, the court allowed the petition, quashed the final assessment order, demand notice, and related notices. The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) was directed to conclude the proceedings by considering the objections filed by the petitioner as per Section 144C of the Income Tax Act. Once the DRP concluded the proceedings, the Assessing Officer was instructed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.