9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P.) Ltd. [ 2021 (4) TMI 355 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] wherein the case of the assessee was that the proceedings before the DRP are definitely circumscribed by the limits of time imposed by Section 153 of the Act whereas the revenue took the stance that the proceedings before the DRP are unfettered by time. The Madras High Court ultimately took the view as aforesaid that the proceedings before the DRP do get circumscribed by the limits of time imposed by Section 153 of the Act. Our attention was also drawn to one decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-15 Vs. Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd. [ 2018 (12) TMI 764 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein the Assessing Officer had passed the final assessment order, which was sought to be corrected by issue of a corrigendum. The High Court took the view that as the time limit to pass the draft assessment order had expired, the order of the Assessing Officer was without jurisdiction. In NOKIA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [ 2017 (9) TMI 1298 - DELHI HIGH COURT] observed that the period of limitation prescribed under Section 153(2A) of the Act would apply. In short, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LORDSHIPS may be pleased to restrain Respondent No.2 their men, employees, subordinates, agents or any other persons claiming or acting through or under them, from passing any orders and/or directions whatsoever in regards to Return of Income filed by the Petitioner herein for Assessment Year 2010-2011, till the final disposal of the present petition; E. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to pass any such other orders and / or directions as it may deem fit in the interest of justice. 2. We have heard Mr. Dhinal Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant. It appears from the materials on record that the writ applicant herein preferred an Appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Ahmedabad, being I.T. (TP) A No. 367/Ahd/2015 for the A.Y. 2010-11 against the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 92CA read with Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act dated 23.12.2014 for the A.Y. 2010-11. The Appeal filed by the writ applicant herein came to be disposed of by the Tribunal vide its order dated 07.08.2015 in the following terms: 7. From the above, it is evident that first entry is dated 11.11.201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see was directed to file chart/submission and time was granted up to 05.12.2014. However, thereafter there is no other noting whether any further hearing took place or not. Considering the totality of these. facts, we are of the opinion that the DRP has passed the order without allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We, therefore, set aside the order of the DRP and restore the matter back to its file. We direct the DRP to allow adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, and thereafter pass a speaking order in respect of assessee's objections in accordance with law. Since we have set aside the order of the DRP, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer in accordance with the directions of the DRP cannot survive. We, therefore, set aside the assessment order dated 23.12.2014 and restore the same back to the file of the Assessing Officer. We direct him to pass the fresh assessment order in accordance with law after receiving fresh direction of the DRP. 3. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that the Tribunal set aside the order of the DRP and also the assessment order dated 23.12.2014. The matter was restored to the file of the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limit prescribed under section 153(3) of the Act. Deputy Commissioner of Income Circle 2(1)(1), Baroda 18 September 2020 We, once again, request your Honor to kindly pass the appropriate order and grant us the refund all with applicable interest till the date of passing order. In case Your Good Self requires any information / clarifications, we would be glad to furnish the same Yours faithfully. Authorised Signatory End: As above 5. We also take notice of the last representation dated 12.02.2021 addressed to the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara, which is at page 134 of the paper book. The same read thus: 12 February, 2021 The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range 2(1) Baroda. Dear Sir, Ref.: SABIC Innovative Plastics India Private Limited ( We') Assessment Year ('AY') 2010-2011 PAN: AABCE7565N Reminder 3-Order giving effect to the Order of Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad (ITAT) We refer to the order of Hon'ble ITAT dated 7 August 2015, setting aside the matter to the file of Han ble Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) and directing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the DRP and the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is to thereafter, under subsection (3), complete the assessment on the basis of the draft order if the assessee has intimated its acceptance of the order or has not filed objections to the same within the time stipulated. In terms of sub-section (4), the Assessing Authority is to pass an order of assessment within one month from the end of the month in which the acceptance of the assessee is received or the period for filing of objections expires. 8. Thus, the Madras High Court addressed itself on the issue whether the proceedings before the DRP are circumscribed by the limits of time imposed by Section 153 of the Act. Before the Madras High Court, the case of the assessee was that the proceedings before the DRP are definitely circumscribed by the limits of time imposed by Section 153 of the Act whereas the revenue took the stance that the proceedings before the DRP are unfettered by time. 9. The Madras High Court ultimately took the view as aforesaid that the proceedings before the DRP do get circumscribed by the limits of time imposed by Section 153 of the Act. 10. Our attention was also drawn to one decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
