9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er passed by the learned Assessing Officer on 15/03/2019 is prima facie bad in law, as the same is barred by limitation. Keeping in view the clear and unambiguous provisions of Sec. 153 of the IT. Act, the Assessment Order, passed in pursuance to the Order of the Hon'ble ITAT u/s. 254 of the IT. Act, was required to be passed by 31/12/2018, being the expiry of nine months from the end of FY 2017-18 during which the Appellate Order of the ITAT was received. 2. That without prejudice to the legal challenge above and on the merits of the case, the Appellant wishes to contend as under: (a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned AO / TPO has erred in and learned DRP has further erred in not granting the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g) That the learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in mechanically initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT. Act in respect of each of the additions made by him in the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s.144C(13) r.w.s. 254. The appellant prays that leave may be granted to add, amend or alter any of the grounds at any time before the final hearing of the appeal." 3. The brief facts in relation to the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 25-09-2009 declaring "Nil" income after claiming deduction under Chapter-VI amounting to Rs. 46,42,60,703/-. Subsequently the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act on 23-01- 2014 wherein the following disallowances were made in the total in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r was to be passed on or before 31st December 2018 being nine months from end of financial year 31st March 2018. Since, the assessment order was passed on 15-03-2019, the same is time barred and hence void ab-initio. 6. In response, the Ld. DR submitted that section 153(3) of the Act does not contain/ govern DRP specifically. Further, he submitted that the ITAT vide Order dated 03-03-2017 remitted the matter to the file of DRP for fresh adjudication. Therefore, first an order was required to be passed by DRP pursuant to directions of ITAT u/s 144C of the Act. The Ld. DR submitted that section 144C specifically contains the words "notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 153" which implies that the time limitation provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... direction is received. Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment and recomputation. 153. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1) and (2), an order of fresh assessment[or fresh order under section 92CA, as the case may be,] in pursuance of an order under section 254 or section 263 or section 264, setting aside or cancelling an assessment,[or an order under section 92CA, as the case may be], may be made at any time before the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the order under section 254 is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section 264 is passed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ow the DRP/assessing officer unrestricted time to pass the orders in pursuance of directions of ITAT, which would clearly be contrary to the intent of the Statute. 7.2 In the recent case of CIT v Roca Bathroom Products (P.) Ltd.[2022] 140 taxmann.com 304 (Madras), the High Court held that sections 144C and 153 are mutually inclusive and not mutually exclusive as both contain provisions relating to section 92CA and are interdependent and overlapping and hence, period of limitation prescribed under section 153(2A) or 153(3) is applicable and when matters are remanded back irrespective of whether it is to Assessing Officer or TPO or DRP, duty is on Assessing Officer to pass orders. The High Court held that even in case of remand, TPO/DRP have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice is taken as 19-2-2014. In that event, the assessing officer ought to have passed the order before 31-12-2014 or at the latest before 31-3-2015 considering that the order was received during the Financial year 2013-14. The transfer of the files to Bengaluru, after the lapse of the time, will not indefinitely extend the time and can have no impact on the time lines. It is an inter-department arrangement and it cannot defeat the rights of the assessee. 22. Insofar as the non-obstante clause in Section 144C(13) is concerned, we concur with the view of the Learned Judge. The exclusion of applicability of Section 153 or Section 153 B is for a limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the directions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
