9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered opinion, this interpretation is in accord with the intent behind insertion of that provision and the bare text and spirit of that section. Thus, we accord our approval to the interpretation as set out in the aforenoted decisions of the Bombay High Court. The procedure of assessment as provided u/s 144C does not envisage or contemplate the interdiction or involvement of the TPO once a directive has been framed by the DRP. The role of the TPO comes to an end once an order as contemplated under Section 92 CA(4) of the Act has come to be framed and remitted to the AO. There was thus no occasion for the TPO having resumed proceedings post the passing of the direction by the DRP on 20 June 2022. Undisputedly, the directive of the DRP came to be uploaded on the ITBA portal on 24 June 2022. It is additionally stated to have been dispatched through Speed Post to the third respondent (TPO) and the fourth respondent (Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi) on 27 June 2022. It is thereafter that the TPO appears to have passed the order dated 25 July 2022. Thus as per the provisions of E-as, 2019, all orders, notices and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directions within one month from the end of the month in which such a direction is received. 3. According to the writ petitioner, the DRP framed its order dated 20 June 2022 in accordance with Section 144C(5) of the Act and which came to be uploaded on the official portal in terms of the E-assessment scheme, 2019 on 24 June 2022. According to learned counsel, the period of one month as contemplated in Section 144C(13) of the Act would thus have to be computed from 30 June 2022, being the last day of the month and which constitutes the starting point for computation of 30 days. Viewed in that light, learned counsel submitted that an order of assessment could have been framed only up to 31 July 2022. 4. However, and undisputedly, the order of assessment came to be made on 24 August 2022. It is in the aforesaid backdrop that the petitioner assails that assessment order and the consequential proceedings initiated in terms thereof. For the purposes of disposal of the instant writ petition, we deem it apposite to take note of the following salient facts. 5. On 26 July 2021, the Transfer Pricing Officer the third respondent, while examining the return as submitted by the petitioner, prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner, drew our attention to the provisions comprised in the E-as, 2019 and submitted that the moment the order of the DRP came to be uploaded, the jurisdictional AO and all other authorities would be deemed to have been duly served and made aware of the making of that order. It was submitted that the uploading of the directive on the ITBA portal was sufficient compliance with the requirements placed under the Act and the fact that the order of the TPO came to be communicated to the jurisdictional AO thereafter would be wholly irrelevant. In fact, learned counsel submitted that once the DRP had framed a direction referable to Section 144C(5) of the Act, there existed no requirement of the matter being considered or examined by the TPO. 9. According to learned counsel, that directive of the DRP bound the AO and who was thus mandatorily required to frame an assessment order in terms thereof. 10. According to learned counsel, the issue which stands raised here is no longer res integra and stands conclusively settled by the decision of the Bombay High Court in Vodafone Idea Limited v. Central Processing Centre Ors. 2023 SCC Online Bom 2464 Our attention was drawn to the following p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Case History Notings of the Faceless Assessing Officer, Mr. Singh candidly stated that was entered by the Faceless Assessing Officer. The fact remains that the Dispute Resolution Panel directions were always visible and accessible to the Faceless Assessing Officer on the Income-tax Business Application portal. 17. Mr. Singh made all attempts to persuade us that despite the Income-tax Business Application portal displaying the Dispute Resolution Panel directions and the same being accessible to the Faceless Assessing Officer, it was only on August 23, 2023, that the same were received by the Faceless Assessing Officer. We cannot accept this because, the E-assessment Scheme itself provides that all communication is deemed to have been received by the assessment units concerned once received through the National e-Assessment Centre. Thus, once the e-assessment Centre is in receipt of the Dispute Resolution Panel directions, the period of limitation runs from that day. There is no requirement of a deep dive in an analysis of the phrase upon receipt of directions as it appears in section 144C(13) of the Act. The fundamental principle of interpretation is to assign words their natural ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prescribed a limitation period for passing the final order, it is expected that the internal procedure of the Department should mould itself to give meaning to and act in aid of the provision. Any procedural defect (there is none in this case) in the internal mechanism of the working of E-assessment Scheme, cannot operate against the interest of the assessee. Hence, the Faceless Assessing Officer cannot be believed that the Dispute Resolution Panel direction was received by him only on August 23, 2023 despite being uploaded on the Income-tax Business Application portal on March 25, 2021. The failure on the part of Department to follow the procedure under section 144C of the Act is not merely a procedural irregularity, but is an illegality and vitiates the entire proceeding. 11. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents while seeking to controvert the aforesaid submissions has essentially reiterated the averments contained in the counter affidavit and has alluded to the order passed by the TPO on 25 July 2022 and thus the AO having proceeded to frame an order of assessment only upon its receipt. 12. Having heard learned counsels for parties, we find ourselves unable to sustain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roposes to make, on or after the 1st day of October, 2009, any variation which is prejudicial to the interest of such assessee. (2) On receipt of the draft order, the eligible assessee shall, within thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order, (a) file his acceptance of the variations to the Assessing Officer; or (b) file his objections, if any, to such variation with, (i) the Dispute Resolution Panel; and (ii) the Assessing Officer. (3) The Assessing Officer shall complete the assessment on the basis of the draft order, if (a) the assessee intimates to the Assessing Officer the acceptance of the variation; or (b) no objections are received within the period specified in sub-section (2). (4) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything contained in Section 153 or Section 153-B, pass the assessment order under sub-section (3) within one month from the end of the month in which, (a) the acceptance is received; or (b) the period of filing of objections under sub-section (2) expires. (5) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall, in a case where any objection is received under sub-section (2), issue such directions, as it thinks fit, for the guidance of the Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee, within one month from the end of the month in which such direction is received. (14) The Board may make rules for the purposes of the efficient functioning of the Dispute Resolution Panel and expeditious disposal of the objections filed under sub-section (2) by the eligible assessee. (14-A) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any assessment or reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner as provided in sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA. (14-B) The Central Government may make a scheme, by notification in the Official Gazette, for the purposes of issuance of directions by the dispute resolution panel, so as to impart greater efficiency, transparency and accountability by (a) eliminating the interface between the dispute resolution panel and the eligible assessee or any other person to the extent technologically feasible; (b) optimising utilisation of the resources through economies of scale and functional specialisation; (c) introducing a mechanism with dynamic jurisdiction for issuance of directions by dispute resolut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e has to straightaway complete the assessment and he does not even have to hear the assessee. The Assessing Officer shall simply comply with the directions received from the DRP within one month from the end of the month in which such direction is received. 18. In this backdrop, we note that both the judgments of the Bombay High Court in Shell India and Vodafone Idea construe the time lines as provided in Section 144C to be mandatory in character. In our considered opinion, this interpretation is in accord with the intent behind insertion of that provision and the bare text and spirit of that section. Thus, we accord our approval to the interpretation as set out in the aforenoted decisions of the Bombay High Court. 19. Further, the procedure of assessment as provided under Section 144C does not envisage or contemplate the interdiction or involvement of the TPO once a directive has been framed by the DRP. The role of the TPO comes to an end once an order as contemplated under Section 92 CA(4) of the Act has come to be framed and remitted to the AO. There was thus no occasion for the TPO having resumed proceedings post the passing of the direction by the DRP on 20 June 2022. 20. Undi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
