TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se is to fast-track a specific type of assessment. This does not however lead to the conclusion that overall time limits have been eschewed in the process. In fact, the argument to the effect that proceedings before the DRP are unfettered by limitation would run counter to the avowed object of setting up of the DRP a high powered and specialised body set up for dealing with matters of transfer pricing. Having set time limits every step of the way, it does not stand to reason that proceedings on remand to the DRP may be done at leisure sans the imposition of any time limit at all. Sub-section (13) to Section 144C, imposes a restriction on the Assessing Officer and denies him the benefit of the more expansive time limit available under Section 153 to pass a final order of assessment as he has to do so within one month from the end of the month when the directions of the DRP are received by him, even without hearing the assessee concerned. Nothing in the language of Section 144C or 153 to lead me to the conclusion that the latter is operated from the operation of the former. The specific exclusion of Section 153 from Section 144C(13) can be read only in the context of that speci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal). The Tribunal, vide order dated 18.12.2015, remanded the matter to R1 for fresh examination and the operative portion of the order is as follows: 13.... In view of the misunderstanding of the facts by the Transfer Pricing Officer and Dispute Resolution Panel, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be reconsidered by the Dispute Resolution Panel once again on the basis of the agreement entered into between the assessee and Roca Sanitaria S.A. Spain. In other words, the Dispute Resolution Panel shall re-examine the issue afresh on the basis of the agreement entered into between the parties and determine the actual function performed by the assessee. The Dispute Resolution Panel has to find out whether the assessee functions only as an independent distributor or as agent of Roca Sanitaria S.A. Spain. Since these facts were not considered by the Transfer Pricing Officer or Dispute Resolution Panel, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be re-examined. Accordingly, the orders of the Assessing Officer are set aside and the Assessing Officer shall refer the matter again to the Dispute Resolution Panel. The Dispute Resol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder under Section 254 was received by the Principal Chief Commissioner/Commissioner. 6. The provisions of Section 153 stood amended by Finance Act, 2016 and the present proceedings would be governed by unamended section 153(2A) (A Y 2009- 10)/amended Section 153(3) (A Y 2010-11) respectively that read as follows: 153.Time limit for completion of assessments and reassessments (2A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- sections (1A), (1B) and (2), in relation to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1971 , and any subsequent assessment year, an order of fresh assessment in pursuant of an order under section 250 or section 254, section 263 or section 264, setting aside or cancelling an assessment, may be made at any time before the expiry of one years from the end of the financial year in which the order under section 250 or Section 254 is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section 264 is passed by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner. 153. Time l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Section 153 or Section 153B and without providing any further opportunity of hearing to the assessee, within one month from the end of the month when the direction from the DRP is received. This, according to her, should be taken to indicate the absolute exclusion of the operation of Section 153 from Section 144C. Learned standing counsel however, concedes to the position that there is no specific limitation prescribed for the disposal of objections by the DRP. This, according to her, is a lacunae that can be remedied only by way of amendment. 10. There is no dispute as regards the dates or sequence of events involved. The question to be decided is as to whether the proceedings before the DRP are circumscribed by the limits of time imposed by Section 153. According to the petitioner, they are, whereas, according to the revenue, proceedings before the DRP are unfettered by time. 11. There is no doubt in my mind that the orders of the Tribunal have not been given effect to in a proper manner by the Assessing Authority. The Tribunal, in the order for AY 2009-10, has set aside the order of assessment directing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion (5) to (12) set out the procedure for receipt, adjudication and disposal of objections by the DRP. Sub-section (5) states that the DRP shall issue such directions as it may think fit to guide the Assessing Officer is completing the assessment. In issuing the guidelines, as per sub-Section (6) the DRP shall take into account the draft order, objections, evidences, reports of authorities and records as per sub-section (6). Sub-section (7) empowers the DRP to make further enquiry, if thought necessary and sub-section (8) confines the power of confirmation, rejection or enhancement of the variations proposed in the draft order. Sub-sections (9) and (10) state that the opinion of the majority of the members shall prevail and that the directions of the DRP bind the Assessing Officer. Sub-section (11) provides for an opportunity of hearing to the assessee prior to issuance of the directions. Sub- section (12) sets out a limitation of nine (9) months from the end of the month in which the draft order is forwarded to the assessee for disposal of the objections received. In passing a final assessment order, sub-section (13) specifically excludes the provisions of Section 153 stating that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 144C(13) can be read only in the context of that specific sub-section and once again, reiterates the urgency that sets the tone for the interpretation of Section 144C itself. 19. The Bombay High Court, in P CIT V. Lion Bridge Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (260 Taxmann 273) was dealing with a challenge to a final order of assessment. It was held that such a final assessment could be made only if the draft assessment had been forwarded by the Assessing Officer to the assessee within the time limit prescribed under Section 153(2A) of the Act. 20. In Lion Bridge (supra) the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had set aside the order of assessment and remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer directing him to pass orders de novo. In appeals filed by the revenue under Section 260A, the substantial question raised was Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal is correct in entertaining the objection that the assessment order is without jurisdiction null and void and unenforceable? While dismissing the appeals, the Division Bench proceeds on the basis that the draft assessment order ought to have been passed within the time frame sti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|