9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riefly facts of the case are as under: The appellant is a partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of herbal pharmaceutical products, consumer/personal care products and animal health care products. The return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 was filed declaring income of Rs. 38,58,85,630/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment by issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short] dated 6/8/2012. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the assessee reported international transaction with its Associated Enterprises (AE) and therefore, referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the AO on 18/2/2016 which is clearly beyond the period prescribed under the provisions of sub-section (13) of section 144C of the Act. Then the issue that requires adjudication is what is the effect of the assessment order, passed by the AO under sub- section (13) of section 144C of the Act, beyond the period prescribed therein? This issue requires to be adjudicated from point of whether the prescription contained in sub-section (13) of section 144C is mandatory that go to the root of the jurisdiction of the AO to pass order If it is a jurisdictional issue, then the courts or the Tribunal cannot direct the AO to do something for which he has no jurisdiction. But the perusal of the entire provisions of section 144C, sub-section (13) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt paragraphs of the judgment are as under: "40. But in this case, sub-section (12) of Section 144C, on the face of it, appears to pose an obstacle. Under sub-section (12), no direction can be issued by the DRP under sub-section (5), after the expiry of nine months from the end of the month in which the draft assessment order was forwarded to the eligible assessee. In this case we have found the date of forwarding of the draft assessment order to be 22-8-2014. Hence, the period stipulated under sub-section (12) would expire by 31-5-2015. But the DRP passed an order on 22-6-2015 holding that it had lost jurisdiction to pass an order on 31-12-2014 itself Even though the date mentioned is not correct, the fact remains that the DRP could not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n behind the insertion of Section 144C is to provide a mechanism for speedy resolution of disputes and to ensure finality to litigation. Therefore the bar under sub-section (12) cannot be treated as one going to the root of the matter. 44. The second reason as to why we opine so is that the Supreme Court itself has understood Section 144C to be of such nature. In Addl. CIT v. HCL Technologies Ltd. [2010] 188 Taxman 303 (SC), the Supreme Court disposed of an appeal filed by the Revenue, directing the authorities to take recourse to the alternative dispute resolution mechanism suggested under Section 144C. Though the said order of the Supreme. Court is a brief order, which did not lay down any ratio, the same gives an indication as to how t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
