9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 788 - AT - Income TaxAssessment u/s 144C - AO issued notice of demand at stage of draft assessment order - HELD THAT - without following the procedure as contemplated u/s. 144C of the Act the AO issued demand notice and penalty notice. Thereby, in our opinion, the final assessment order 28-04-2014 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act lacked validity and it is liable to be quashed The assessee had participated in the proceedings and the provision u/s. 292BB is applicable. Nowhere in the provision u/s. 144C mentioned that the assessee has to approach DRP. The assessee itself approached CIT(A) admitting the fact that it is not approaching to DRP. This Tribunal in the case of Atlas Copco (India) Limited 2019 (8) TMI 1415 - ITAT PUNE held a detailed discussion in respect of provisions u/s. 144C of the Act, the decisions of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Kalyan Kumar Ray 1991 (8) TMI 291 - SUPREME COURT and Vijay Television (P) Ltd. 2014 (6) TMI 540 - MADRAS HIGH COURT and held that the final assessment order is null and void for the reason the AO issued notice of demand at stage of draft assessment order which actually ought to have been done at the stage of passing the final assessment order. Therefore, in our opinion, the facts and circumstances in the case of Atlas Copco (India) Limited 2019 (8) TMI 1415 - ITAT PUNE and the findings thereon by the Tribunal is applicable to the facts and circumstances in the present case and resulting to, the final assessment order dated 28-04-2014 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act is set aside. Thus, additional ground raised by the assessee are allowed.
Issues involved:
1. Validity of draft assessment order passed without following the mandate of section 144C of the Income Tax Act. 2. Admissibility of additional grounds of appeal. 3. Compliance with the procedure under section 144C of the Act. 4. Applicability of previous tribunal decisions and higher court judgments. 5. Effect of issuing demand notice based on draft assessment order. 6. Functioning of the AO in completing the assessment process. Issue 1: Validity of draft assessment order: The appellant challenged the final assessment order passed by the AO, contending that the draft assessment order was issued without following the provisions of section 144C of the Act. The AO had proposed an addition to the income without providing directions for acceptance or objections to the Dispute Resolution Panel. The Tribunal admitted additional grounds of appeal for adjudication, citing the necessity to follow the mandated procedures under section 144C. Issue 2: Admissibility of additional grounds: The appellant filed additional grounds of appeal, asserting that the AO erred in passing the draft assessment order without following the provisions of section 144C. The Tribunal admitted these additional grounds for adjudication, emphasizing the importance of addressing legal grounds raised by the appellant. Issue 3: Compliance with section 144C procedure: The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of section 144C, which require the AO to forward a draft assessment order to the eligible assessee for any prejudicial variations. The eligible assessee must respond within thirty days by accepting the variations or filing objections with the Dispute Resolution Panel. Failure to follow this procedure can render the final assessment order invalid. Issue 4: Applicability of previous judgments: The Tribunal referred to previous decisions, including the case of DCIT Vs. Atlas Copco (India) Limited, to support the argument that issuing a demand notice based on a draft assessment order can invalidate the final assessment order. Citing judgments from the Supreme Court and High Courts, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of following prescribed procedures in the assessment process. Issue 5: Effect of demand notice based on draft order: The Tribunal highlighted that issuing a demand notice before the final assessment order is passed can undermine the validity of the assessment process. Quoting relevant legal precedents, the Tribunal emphasized the integrated nature of the assessment process and the necessity of following procedural requirements under section 144C. Issue 6: Functioning of the AO in assessment process: The Tribunal scrutinized the actions of the AO in completing the assessment process, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the prescribed procedures under section 144C. The AO's failure to await the specified period for the assessee's response and issuing demand notices prematurely led to the final assessment order lacking validity. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, setting aside the final assessment order due to procedural irregularities and non-compliance with the provisions of section 144C of the Income Tax Act. The decision underscored the significance of following statutory procedures in the assessment process to ensure the validity and legality of the final assessment order.
|
