9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 129 - HC - Income TaxTP Adjustment - period of limitation - Whether order of the TPO as barred by limitation u/s 92CA(3A)? - As contended sixty days period expired on 31.10.2019 and therefore the impugned order of TPO the second respondent herein is barred by limitation - HELD THAT - Since the Division Bench of this Court has already considered the very same issue that has been raised in this writ petition the benefit granted to those petitioners must also enure to the benefit of this writ petitioner also. Accordingly the impugned order dated 01.11.2019 is hereby quashed on the ground that the same is barred by limitation and it has been passed beyond the time limit fixed under Section 92CA(3A) of the Income Tax Act.
Issues:
Challenge to order of Transfer Pricing Officer on grounds of limitation under Section 92CA(3A) of the Income Tax Act 1961. Analysis: The petitioner contested the order dated 01.11.2019 issued by the Transfer Pricing Officer for the assessment year 2016-17, claiming it was time-barred under Section 92CA(3A) of the Income Tax Act. The key point of contention was whether the order was passed within the sixty-day limitation period prior to the assessment order deadline of 31.12.2019. The Department argued the order was within the prescribed time limit, while the petitioner argued it was beyond the deadline. The issue of limitation was previously addressed in a batch of writ petitions by other assessees, resulting in a judgment that the Transfer Pricing Officer's order was indeed time-barred. The Department appealed this decision in Writ Appeals before the Division Bench, which upheld the earlier ruling on 31.03.2022. The Division Bench confirmed that the order should have been issued by 31.10.2019, making the 01.11.2019 order invalid due to exceeding the limitation period. The Standing Counsels for the respondents did not challenge the Division Bench's judgment but mentioned that Special Leave Petitions had been filed with condone delay petitions in response. The Supreme Court had ordered notice in some cases and allowed delay condonation in one specific petition. Despite no stay being granted by the Supreme Court, the Division Bench's decision was considered applicable to the present case, leading to the quashing of the impugned order dated 01.11.2019 on grounds of being time-barred under Section 92CA(3A) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition was closed without costs.
|
