CUPINO LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT)-2(1)(1), MUMBAI

The assessee in both the years i.e. in both the appeals has raised various grounds on merits and also additional grounds. We also noted that the additional grounds raised are identical and particularly, ground No.8 which is regarding time barring of assessment in both the years. Hence, we will take the facts from AY 2013-14 and ground also and will adjudicate the issue, which will apply to other year i.e. AY 2014-15 also.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee stated that first of all the Bench should adjudicate the issue of time barring of assessment raised vide ground No. 8: - “Ground No.8 On the facts, in the circumstances of the case, in law and without prejudice to earlier grounds, the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in not passing the assessment order within the time limit prescribed for competing of assessment proceedings under section 153 of the Act.”

The learned Counsel for the assessee Mr. PJ Pardiwalla stated that in the assessment proceedings for AY 2013-14, the Assessing Officer passed the draft assessment order denying the beneficial provisions of

When this fact was pointed out, the learned Sr. DR on behalf of the Revenue argued that this ground is primarily raised on the fact that the Assessing Officer has not proposed any variation to the returned income and therefore, the provision of Section 144C(1) of the Act do not apply. It is the case of the assessee that in such a situation the Assessing Officer should have issued the final assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act instead of passing of draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(1) of the Act. It was argued by

The learned counsel for the assessee Mr. PJ Pardiwala, stated the fact that on perusal of assessment proceedings for relevant assessment year 2013-14 there is no proposed variation in the income or losses reported by the assessee to the Income Tax authority. The matter before

We noted that the draft assessment order was issued on 29.12.2016 under section 143(3) read with section 144C(1) of the Act and in that eventuality, finally the assessment order was passed on 16.10.2017. From the above, we find that there is no dispute that if there would not have draft assessment order, the assessment would have been time barred as on 31.12.2016, the present assessment order dated 16.10.2017. Once, we hold that no draft assessment order would have been issued in this case as the provisions of Section 144C(1) of the Act could not have been invoked in this case. The time limit for completion assessment was available only to 31.12.2016, hence, we are of the view that the issuance of draft assessment order cannot end up increasing the time limit for completion of the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. This issue has been adjudicated by the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of IPF India Property Cyprus (No.1) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2020) 183 ITD 46 (Mumbai-Trib.), wherein it is held as under: - “6. Once this amendment is being introduced with effect from 1st April 2020, it is beyond any doubt of controversy that so far as the period prior to 1st April 2020 is concerned, the cases in which no variations in the returned income or loss were proposed, the draft assessment orders were not required to be issued. We, therefore, uphold the plea of the assessee on this point.

8. As the impugned assessment order itself is held to be time barred, all other grievances raised in appeal, which deal with the merits of stand taken by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, are rendered academic and infructuous. No adjudication, therefore, is required on these grievances at this stage.”

We noted that in the present case neither the learned Sr. DR nor the assessee has disputed the fact and there is proposed variation in the income or losses reported by the assessee to the Income Tax Sd/- Sd/- (भनोज कुभाय अग्रवार / MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (भहावीय स िंह /MAHAVIR SINGH) (रेखा दस्म / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (उऩाध्मक्ष / VICE PRESIDENT) भुिंफई, ददनािंक/ Mumbai, Dated: 26.03.2021 ुदीऩ यकाय, व. ननजी चिव/ Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS