Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 1282 - ITAT DELHIValidity of order passed u/s 144C - non-implementation of directions of DRP in the final assessment - Taxability of receipts as FTS/FIS - assessees have received fees towards rendering certain services to RIL for its plants situated in Jamnagar SEZ - HELD THAT:- In the facts of the present appeal, undisputedly, the AO has not implemented the directions of DRP as mandated u/s 144C(10) r.w.s. 144C(13) - Surprisingly, even though, the AO has reproduced the directions of DRP in the body of the assessment orders, however, he failed to implement the specific direction of DRP and has merely done a cut paste job of the draft assessment order by repeating the additions made therein treating the receipts as FTS/FIS. This can be due to a conscious disregard to the directions of DRP or final assessment orders have been passed mechanically without application of mind. Non-implementation of directions of DRP in terms of section 144C renders the final assessment order wholly without jurisdiction and void-abinitio. The plethora of decisions cited by learned counsel appearing for the assessee express similar view. Therefore, we do not intend to deal in detail with them. Thus, keeping in view the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Jurisdiction High Court in M/s. ESPN Star Sports Mauritius S.N.C. ET Compagnie [2016 (4) TMI 45 - DELHI HIGH COURT] we hold that the impugned assessment orders are wholly without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction, hence, void-ab-initio. Therefore, assessment orders under challenge in these appeals deserve to be quashed. Accordingly, we do so. Before parting, we must observe, this is not a stray instance coming to our notice, wherein, the Assessing Officer has not implemented the directions of DRP. We have come across several cases of such non-implementation of directions of learned DRP by the AO while passing final assessment orders. There is no gainsaying that in the hierarchy of tax administration, the DRP holds higher position than the AO. Therefore, for that reason and as per statutory mandate, the AO are bound to follow the directions of DRP. Non-implementation of the directions issued by DRP, either consciously or due to non- application of mind by the Assessing Officers often put the department in an embarrassing situation as the learned counsels appearing for the Revenue find it difficult to defend the action of the AO. Such repeated instances of non-implementation of directions of learned DRP by the AO expose lack of proper orientation and training. We hope and expect that the authorities concerned would look into this aspect and address the issue with the seriousness it deserves.
|