HAZIRA PORT PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CICLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 265/AHD/2022Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 September 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)15 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the second assessment order was invalid as the DRP could not issue directions when the assessment proceedings had already attained finality with the passing of the first assessment order and an appeal was pending. Therefore, the second assessment order was not sustainable in law.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed objections before the DRP, but the Assessing Officer (AO) passed a final assessment order before receiving directions from the DRP. Subsequently, the AO passed a second assessment order to give effect to the DRP's directions. The assessee had also filed an appeal against the first assessment order.

What were the issues?

Whether a second assessment order passed pursuant to DRP directions is valid when a final assessment order and an appeal against it already exist. The validity of transfer pricing adjustments and corporate tax grounds were also raised but not adjudicated due to the primary legal issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(3),Section 144B,Section 92C(3),Section 92(3),Section 92BA,Section 80IA(10),Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra & Shri Ankit Sahni
For Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT DR
Pronounced: 26.09.2025

PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Dispute Resolution Panel-2, (in short “Ld. CIT(DRP-2)”), Mumbai-1 vide order dated 28.04.2022 passed for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“Legal Grounds

1.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the NaFAC has grossly erred in passing an assessment order u/s 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) and Section 144B of the Act dated September 15, 2021 (“First Assessment Order”), without awaiting the directio

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(3)

All 595 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →