9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibed 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 Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction (2), after the draft Assessment Order dated 29.09.2021 was issued to the petitioner, the petitioner had two options viz., either to file his acceptance as provided under sub-section (2)(a) or to file objections as per sub-section (2)(b) of the I.T. Act. 4. It is contention of the petitioner that the petitioner submitted his objections on 28.10.2021 to the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) within the prescribed period; in view of change in the mechanism of assessment being shifted to the faceless scheme coupled with the Covid-19 pandemic exigency, the petitioner could not intimate the Assessing Officer about filing of the objections before the DRP; however, on 12.11.2021, the Assessing Officer issued notice to the petitioner seeking cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndoned and a lenient view is to be taken and indulgence in this regard is to be shown in favour of the petitioner, particularly when the petitioners had filed their objections before the DRP on 28.10.2021 within the prescribed period and the petitioner having intimated the same to the Assessing Officer prior to passing the impugned order. It is therefore contended that the impugned assessment order is violative of the aforesaid mandatory provisions of Section 144C, particularly, since the petitioner had filed his objections to the draft assessment order before the DRP within the prescribed period and intimated the same to the Assessing Officer and consequently, the impugned Assessment Order and consequential notice deserve to be quashed and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 13 to Section 144C. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that 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. 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned final assessment order bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021- 22/1036959912(1) at Annexure-A dated 15.11.202 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
