TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prescribed under Section 144C(2)(b), the rest of the procedure should be followed as prescribed and the final assessment order ought to be passed by the Assessing Officer in accordance with the directions issued by the DRP. This Court is further of the view that no prejudice will be caused to the Respondent-Department if the present petition is allowed and the impugned assessment order is set aside as Respondent-Department would be well within its rights to pass a fresh assessment order post the receipt of direction from the Respondent No. 3-DRP. Accordingly the impugned assessment order, the computation sheet as well as all the subsequent notices are set aside and the writ petition is allowed. - HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 144C(2)(b)(ii) of the Act. He states that due to the inadvertent lapse on behalf of the Petitioner, Respondent No. 1- Assessing Officer passed the impugned final assessment order dated 21st November, 2023, thereby closing the assessment for the year under consideration. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that since the Petitioner had exercised its statutory remedy of filing its objections before the Respondent No. 3-DRP, the impugned final assessment order should not have been passed by the Respondent No. 1- Assessing Officer before the Respondent No. 3-DRP issued its directions for framing of the assessment. 4. In support of his submission, he relies on the judgment dated 19th July, 2023 passed by the High Court of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... days of the receipt of the draft order. He states that the Assessing Officer was well within his right to pass the impugned assessment order dated 21st November, 2023 and he cannot be faulted for finalising the assessment in accordance with the prescribed procedure. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the issue at hand is no longer res integra as it has been decided by the Bombay High Court in Sulzer Pumps (supra) wherein it has been held as under:- 6. In our view since petitioner had already filed a reference raising his objections to the DRP and Section 144C (4) of the Act requires the Assessing Officer to pass the final order including the view expressed by the DRP, we will be justified ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
