9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g as under: - "issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the assessment proceedings for AY 2005-06 (sic) [AY 2006-07] are barred by limitation therefore, direct the Respondents to grant refund of taxes paid/ deposited/adjusted in the case of Petitioner for AY 2005-06 (sic) [AY 2006-07], along with applicable interest under Section 244A (1) and 244A (1A) of the Act, as per law;" 2. The petitioner is a company incorporated in India and is a 100 percent subsidiary of Schneider France. During the previous year relevant to Assessment Year [AY] 2006-07, the petitioner was engaged in the business of manufacturing low voltage and medium voltage equipments - Air Circuit Breakers (ACB), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellate Tribunal [ITAT] in ITA No. 5867/Del/2010. The learned ITAT allowed the said appeal for statistical purposes by the order dated 23.11.2012 and set aside the assessment order as well as directions issued by the learned Dispute Resolution Panel [DRP]. The learned ITAT restored the matter before the learned DRP with the direction to issue de novo direction in accordance with law and after affording due opportunity to the petitioner. The learned ITAT also directed the AO to allow the relief as claimed with reference to the depreciation. 7. It is the petitioner's contention that pursuant to the order dated 23.11.2012 passed by the learned ITAT, the AO was obligated to pass the consequential/appeal effect order, latest by 31.03.2015, adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the financial year in which the order under Section 250 or Section 254 was received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner. 10. According to the petitioner, the period to pass the order on remand by the learned ITAT expired on 31.03.2015, however, no order was passed by the AO till the date. Thus, the assessment proceedings in respect of AY 2006-07 are time barred. 11. Concededly, the issue is covered by the decision of this court in Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd. v. Pr. CIT(LTU) New Delhi & Anr.: 2023 SCC Online Del 8357 and the decision in Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.: Neutral citation: 2023/DHC/001521. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
