Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 136 - HC - Income TaxMaintainability of writ against draft assessment order passed u/s 143 (3) r.w.s. 144C - effective and efficacious alternative remedy under the IT Act - valuation of the share for the buy-back u/s 77 A of the Companies Act - Determination of FMV under Rule 11UA - taxability of excess consideration over FMV u/s 56(1) - violation of principles of natural justice - matter refer to TPO who come to conclusion"no adverse inference is drawn" - HELD THAT:- In the present case, buy-back of shares in accordance with Section 77A of the Companies Act was completed before 01.06.2013 and the Income Tax Returns filed by the petitioners were also accepted by the Assessing Officer, however notice un/s 143(2) dated 28.08.2015 and 31.08.2015 were issued and the impugned Draft Assessment Orders came to be passed on 31.12.2017, i.e., nearly about 2 1/2 years after initiation of the proceedings. It is to be noted that the Draft Assessment Orders are required to be passed within the prescribed time. In the meanwhile, the Authorized Representative of the petitioner-Company appeared before the respondent and submitted the documents and a reply to the showcause notice. The dates and events mentioned would prove that there is no breach of violation of principles of natural justice.This Court does not find any merit in the contention that the principles of natural justice has been violated. The Dispute Resolution Panel is empowered by the Act to consider the objections, and pass suitable orders, viz., may confirm, reduce or enhance the variations proposed in the draft order. The Assessing Officer is bound to pass final Assessment Orders in tune with the order of the Dispute Resolution Panel. Against the final order, the First Appeal lies before the CIT(A) u/s 246 and Second Appeal lies before the Appellate Tribunal u/s 253. Thereafter, an appeal lies to the High Court u/s 260A on the substantial questions of law. In the matter on hand, except the two grounds dealt with supra, no other good reasons pleaded by the petitioners to bypass the statutory remedies. Keeping in mind, the principles laid down in the above decisions and the facts of this case, in my opinion, these Writ Petitions are not maintainable at this stage. In that view, these Writ Petitions fail and they are accordingly dismissed.
|