Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 222 - HC - Income TaxOrder of assessment in pursuance of directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel - variations proposed in the draft order - Objection filled within period of limitation - appeal-able order u/s 246(1)(a) - Held that:- In a case where objection is received, the Dispute Resolution Panel might issue such directions as it might think for the guidance of the Assessing Officer to enable him to complete the assessment [Section 144C(5)]. The Dispute Resolution Panel may also make such further enquiry as it thinks fit or cause any further enquiry to be made by any Income Tax Authority and report the result of it to the Dispute Resolution Panel before issuing any directions, referred to in Section 144C(5). As found by the Dispute Resolution Panel, an objection is to be filed by an aggrieved assessee within thirty days from the date of receipt of the draft assessment order. Dispute Resolution Panel has no power and/or authority and/or jurisdiction to condone the delay in filing the objection. When an objection is filed before the Dispute Resolution Panel beyond the stipulated time of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, there is no objection before the Dispute Resolution Panel in the eye of law. An order of rejection of an objection on the ground of the same being barred by limitation is not a direction under sub-section 5 read with sub-section 6 to Section 144C. Though the impugned order dated 10.11.2016 rejecting the objection on the ground of the bar of limitation is captioned as a direction under Section 144C(5)is not in fact a direction under Section 144C(5). The quoting of a wrong provision in an order is a mistake apparent on the face of the record and, therefore, inconsequential. The impugned assessment order though stated as an order under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) is not an order in pursuance of the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel, but an order of assessment simplicitor under Section 143(3) from which an appeal would lie to the Commissioner (Appeals). The learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition and remitted the appellant to his remedy of appeal before the first appellate authority. The time granted to the appellant by the learned Single Bench to file an appeal before the First Appellate Authority as against the impugned order passed by the second respondent is extended for a further period of four weeks from date. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
|