9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subsequently physically / manually signed on 12.08.2021 and furnished to the petitioner along with an email on 13.08.2021 is clearly borne out from the material on record. In other words, despite recognising, confirming and affirming that the TPO order was not signed either physically or digitally on 31.07.2021, the 1st respondent signed the same physically only subsequent on 12.08.2021 and it is this manually / physically signed copy that was uploaded on the ITBA portal on 16.08.2021, thereby leading to the sole inference that as on the last date of limitation i.e., 31.07.2021, a legally valid TPO order had not been passed by the 1st respondent and as such, the impugned order deserves to be quashed. TPO order was not passed on the last dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The physically / manually signed TPO order was also uploaded in the ITBA portal only on 16.08.2021, much beyond the last date of limitation i.e., 31.07.2021. The mere generation of DIN number in the TPO order is not sufficient to cure the various inherent defects, lacunae, omissions and deficiencies in the TPO order which was barred by limitation warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. The impugned TP Order at Annexure-C said to have been passed on 31.07.2021 and the consequent draft assessment order at Annexure-M dated 29.09.2021 are illegal and arbitrary and deserves to be quashed. WP allowed. - Hon'ble Mr Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar For the Petitioner : Sri. Nageshwar Rao., Advocate For Sri. Mohan Maiya G L., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f in terms prayer (b) and (c) above; e) Such further and/or other orders be made and /or directions be given as would afford complete relief to the Petitioner. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents revenue and perused the material on record. 3. Briefly stated the facts and contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner are as follows:- Petitioner is a private limited company to whom a digitally show cause notice dated 14.07.2021 was issued by the 1st respondent Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) rejecting the transfer pricing analysis submitted by the petitioner for the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner submits its response dated 19.07.2021 and the last date prescribed for passing an order by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... error in the ITBA portal, the order was generated without digital signature. It is contended that on 02.08.2021, the 2nd respondent realised this mistake in the TPO order not being digitally signed before being uploaded on 31.07.2021 and accordingly, issued a reminder dated 02.08.021 to send a signed copy immediately for necessary action. So also, one more reminder dated 16.08.2021 was issued by the 2nd respondent in this regard to provide a signed copy of TPO order, since the same was not digitally signed at the time of being uploaded on 31.07.2021. It is further contended that a physically / manually signed TPO order was provided to the petitioner on 02.08.2021 and 13.08.2021. It is contended that the DIN number shown in the TPO order is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondents, the TPO order could not be signed digitally on 31.07.2021 due to a technical glitch / error in the ITBA portal. It follows therefrom that what was alleged to be passed and uploaded on the ITBA portal on 31.07.2021 i.e., the last date of limitation was only digitally unsigned TPO order which was also not signed physically or manually. In this context, it is relevant to state that it was incumbent upon the TPO order to be digitally signed in terms of the CBDT Circular dated 12.02.2018 r/w Section 282A of the I.T.Act. Under these circumstances, it is clear that the TPO order having not been signed digitally before purporting to be passed and uploaded on 31.07.2021 is clearly illegal and non-est and the same deserves to be quashed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of events that emerge from the material on record including the rival pleadings and documents can be summarised as under:- (i) The TPO order was not passed on the last date of limitation i.e., 31.07.2021 as contended by the respondents; (ii) The TPO order, even if passed, had not been digitally or physically / manually signed by 1st respondent on the last date i.e., 31.07.2021, thereby rendering the same illegal, invalid and barred by limitation; (iii) The TPO order had not been uploaded on the ITBA portal on 31.07.2021, the last date of limitation; (iv) The 2nd respondent addressed an email on 02.08.2021 to the 1st respondent confirming that the TPO order had not been digitally signed and asked him to take necessary action, thereby also in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
