TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer. No merit in the present appeal as the issue is covered by decision of this court in JCB India Ltd. [2017 (9) TMI 673 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. - ITA 1307/2018 - - - Dated:- 26-11-2018 - MR. SANJIV KHANNA AND MR. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI JJ. Appellant Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr.Dushyant Sarna, Adv. Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra and Mr. Rohan Khare, Advs. SANJIV KHANNA, J. (ORAL): CM APP No. 48707/2018 (exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CM APP No. 48705-48706/2018 (condonation of delay) These applications for delay in filing and delay in re-filing of 34 days and 25 days respectively are condoned as the applications are not opposed by the counsel for the respondent. Applications are allowed. ITA 1307/2018 This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of NT Back Office Services Pvt. Ltd (earlier known as Globerian India Pvt. Ltd.) arises from the order dated 22.02.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( Tribunal , for short) and relates to Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... milar is the position though for the year under consideration, the objections of the assessee were rejected for want of limitation, which was not the case for the assessment year 2006-07. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the 'submissions of the assessee with regard to this issue were not gone into, much less adjudicated upon. Being seized of the matter by way of ground No.2 raised by the assessee, we deem it appropriate to remit this matter also to the file of the AO to be decided afresh in accordance with law on providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The AO shall, no doubt, keep in consideration, besides facts for the year under consideration, the decision to be arrived at on both the issues, for the assessment year 2006-07. 5. The Tribunal in the first round had set aside the assessment order with direction to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh assessment order on merits after hearing the respondent-assessee. The Tribunal had not remanded the matter to the post-the-hearing stage under the procedure prescribed in Section 144C of the Act. A fresh assessment order was to be passed in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons is received or period for filing of objections to the draft order expires. Sub-Sections (1) to (4) do not postulate and envisage any hearing on merits being given by the Assessing Officer after passing of the draft assessment order and before the final order is passed. When an assessee does not file objections against the draft assessment order, final order is passed without any fresh hearing. The final order passed by the Assessing Officer in such cases would be identical to the draft assessment order without any modification or changes. 7. Sub-Sections (5) to (14) to Section 144C of the Act read;- (5) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall, in a case where any objection is received under sub-section (2), issue such directions, as it thinks fit, for the guidance of the Assessing Officer to enable him to complete the assessment. (6) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall issue the directions referred to in sub-section (5), after considering the following, namely:- (a) draft order; (b) objections filed by the assessee; (c) evidence furnished by the assessee; (d) report, if any, of the Assessing Officer, Valuation Officer or Transfer Pricing Officer o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posal of the objections filed under sub-section (2) by the eligible assessee. Sub-sections (5) till (14) prescribe detailed procedure to be followed by the DRP, including power to make or direct to cause further inquiry; confirm, reduce or enhance the variations in the proposed draft order. Every direction under these sub-sections is binding on the Assessing Officer. No direction can be passed unless the opportunity for hearing is given to the assessee and the Assessing Officer. Time limit for passing such order is also prescribed. These provisions are mandatory. 8. In the present case, the Assessing Officer had written a letter dated 25.11.2013 to the DRP enclosing a copy of the order of the Tribunal dated 15.03.2012, requesting for issue of necessary directions for compliance. The DRP vide letter dated 11.02.2014 had informed the Assessing Officer as under:- This is to refer to your letter dated 25.11.2013. As per the Ld. ITAT order dated 18.03.2012 (Para-9), the direction of Hon ble Tribunal are more than apparently clear i.e. to remit the matter to the file of AO to be decided afresh after providing the due opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, I have been di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
