THE LUBRIZOL CORPORATION ,USA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INT. TAXATION)-3(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1672/MUM/2022Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 September 2026AY 2017-1819 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) passed a final assessment order that did not fully conform to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). The AO later rectified this mistake under Section 154. The assessee argued the final order was void due to non-compliance with Section 144C(13) and that rectification could not cure this jurisdictional error.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while the AO initially failed to implement the DRP's directions, the subsequent rectification under Section 154 cured the apparent mistake. The Tribunal also directed the deletion of an addition related to reimbursement of expenses treated as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) as the 'make available' condition was not met. The issue of corporate guarantee commission was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether a rectification order under Section 154 can cure a defect in a final assessment order passed under Section 144C(13) that failed to conform to DRP directions. Whether reimbursement of expenses without a profit element and without satisfying the 'make available' condition constitutes FTS.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144C,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “I” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Hardik Nirmal And Ms. Urvi Jhaveri
For Respondent: Shri Sridhar G. Menon, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 02.07.2026Pronounced: 25.09.2026

Per Saktijit Dey, Vice President:

Captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the final assessment order dated 28.2.2022 passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “the Act”], pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18, in pursuance of the directions of learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP).

2.

In addition to the main ground, the assessee has raised certain additional grounds, one amongst them being Ground No. 20, reading as under: “Ground No. 20: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the final assessment order dated 28 April 2022 passed by the

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 144C

All 3,666 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →