9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt order was served upon the petitioner company only on 27.12.2018, the objections filed by it on 24/25.01.2019 were well within time. The action of the AO in proceeding with the final assessment on the ground that the said objections were filed beyond time and the action of the Dispute Resolution Panel in rejecting the said objections, on the same ground, therefore cannot be countenanced. The writ petition is accordingly allowed setting aside the final assessment order dated 27.02.2019 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. The Dispute Resolution Panel-1, Bangalore, shall consider the objections of the petitioner company submitted on 24.01.2019 as per Section 144C(5) and (6) and issue necessary directio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at it had received the draft assessment order only on 27.12.2018 and was thinking of filing its objections against the same before the Dispute Resolution Panel-1, Bangalore. 3. The Income Tax authorities however proceeded on the ground that the draft assessment order was received by the petitioner company on 17.12.2018 and rejected its objections. This led to passing of the final assessment order dated 27.02.2019, raising a demand of ₹ 31,13,71,207/-. The Dispute Resolution Panel-1, Bangalore, also passed an order to the same effect holding that the petitioner company had not filed its objections within time. 4. We may note that Section 144C of the Act of 1961 provides for forwarding of the draft assessment order to the assessee s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was received by the petitioner company on 17.12.2018. 6. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad, filed a counter-affidavit asserting that the draft assessment order was received by the petitioner company on 17.12.2018. He filed a copy of the data received from the postal authorities in support of this assertion. 7. The authorized signatory of the petitioner company thereupon filed a reply denying the assertion of the Deputy Commissioner that it had received the draft assessment order on 17.12.2018. Therewith, the authorized signatory also filed the information collected from the postal authorities with regard to service of the said draft assessment order. 8. When this Court took up the matter for hearing on 31.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces, Secunderabad, is placed on record. 10. In the light of this admitted fact that the draft assessment order was served upon the petitioner company only on 27.12.2018, the objections filed by it on 24/25.01.2019 were well within time. The action of the Assessing Officer in proceeding with the final assessment on the ground that the said objections were filed beyond time and the action of the Dispute Resolution Panel in rejecting the said objections, on the same ground, therefore cannot be countenanced. 11. The writ petition is accordingly allowed setting aside the final assessment order dated 27.02.2019 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. The Dispute Resolution Panel-1, Bangalore, shall consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
