SIGMA ELECTRIC MANUFACTURING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,CHAKAN vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITTPA 2683/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 June 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted the additional evidence filed by the assessee in the interest of justice. However, since this evidence was not presented before the Assessing Officer (AO) or the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) during the original assessment proceedings, the Tribunal decided to set aside the order passed under Section 92CA(3) of the Act by the TPO. The matter was remanded to the TPO for de novo adjudication. The TPO was directed to provide the assessee with an opportunity of hearing. Following the TPO's order, the AO was to pass a Draft Assessment Order under Section 144C of the Act. The assessee would then have the liberty to file objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) against the Draft Assessment Order. If no objections were filed before the DRP, the AO would proceed to pass the Final Assessment Order. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sigma Electric Manufacturing Corporation Private Limited, filed an appeal against the Final Assessment Order passed under Section 143(3) read with Sections 144C(13) and 144B of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2022-23 on October 29, 2025. The assessee's representative at the hearing requested admission of additional evidence, which they contended was crucial to the issue. The Revenue's representative did not object to the admission of this evidence, but requested an opportunity for the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to examine it. The Tribunal considered the additional evidence filed by the assessee.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the additional evidence filed by the assessee should be admitted by the Tribunal, and if so, what is the consequential direction? (Question of procedure and evidence) Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the additional evidence was vital to the core of the issue and therefore should be admitted. The assessee relied on the principle of natural justice and the need for a fair adjudication. The assessee's representative specifically pleaded for the admission of this evidence. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue did not object to the admission of the additional evidence. However, the Revenue's representative submitted that the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) should be provided an opportunity to examine the additional evidence. The Revenue did not present any other arguments or rely on any specific authorities in this regard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 144B,Section 92CA(3),Section 144C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE

Before: SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Sharad Shah
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari-CIT DR

आदेश/ORDER

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the Final Assessment Order was passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act for AY 2022-23 on 29-10-2025.

2.

Findings and analysis: We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case Final Assessment Order was passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act for AY 2022-23 on 29-10-2025.

2.1 At the outset Ld. AR submitted application for admission of additional evidence. Ld.AR submitted that it goes to the root of the issue involved , hence pleaded that the additional evidence may be admitted.

3.

Ld. DR has not objected to the Admission of Additional evidence. Ld. DR submitted that the TPO shall be provided opportunity.

IT(TP)A No.2683/PUN/2025

4.

The additional evidence filed by the Assessee is scanned and reproduced here as under :

5.

In the interest of justice we admit the Additional evidence filed by the Assessee. However, since these details were not filed before the AO/TPO we set aside the Order u/s 92CA(3) of the Act passed by the

IT(TP)A No.2683/PUN/2025

Transfer Pricing Officer to the TPO for de-novo adjudication. Accordingly, the TPO shall provide opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. After the Order of the TPO the AO shall pass Draft Assessment Order u/s 144C of the Act. Assessee shall be at liberty to file Objections before the DRP against the Draft Assessment Order as per provisions of Act. If assessee does not file objections before the Dispute resolution Pannel then the AO shall pass the Final Assessment Order as per the provisions of the Act. Accordingly, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th June, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 30-06-2026 Ravi Kumar Digitally signed by Ravi Kumar Ravi Kumar Date: 2026.06.30 17:34:47 +05'30' आदेशकीप्रतितितिअग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी/ The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/ The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘C’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्डफ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकरअपीलीयअदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

IT(TP)A No.2683/PUN/2025

S.No. Details Date Designation 1 Draft dictated on Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before the Second 3 JM/AM Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to the Office 9 Superintendent 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 144C(13)

All 3,426 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →