BAXTER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON, HARYANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the Revenue should follow the procedure under Section 158AB when an identical question of law is pending before a higher court. It also noted that a mere stay order does not obliterate the binding nature of a judgment, and a High Court's decision is binding on the Tribunal until a contrary decision is given by another competent High Court.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against final assessment orders for multiple assessment years. The primary contention was that the assessment orders for A.Y. 2020-21 and 2021-22 were time-barred due to being passed beyond the prescribed limitation period under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act.
What were the issues?
Whether assessment orders passed beyond the prescribed limitation period are valid. The interplay between Section 144C and Section 153 of the Income Tax Act regarding limitation periods.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 144B,Section 153(1),Section 153(4),Section 158AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide 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.
- 267 citing
- CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf235 citing113 ITR 589 · 1978 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Heard together (4 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The captioned appeals are filed by the Assessee challenging the Final Assessment Orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.
Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act in short) dated 31/10/2017 pertaining to A.Y 2013-14, dated 06/04/2022 pertaining to A.Y 2017-18, dat
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.
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.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Ls Cable India Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs ACIT, New DelhiDelhi29 Jan 2026Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf and 1 other authority
The Tribunal admitted the additional ground of appeal, holding that the assessment orders were passed beyond the time frame prescribed under Section 153 read with Section 144C of the Act. Consequently, the impugned final...
- Itron India P.Ltd, Delhi vs DCIT, Circle-10(1), New DelhiDelhi29 Jan 2026Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the final assessment order was barred by limitation as per Section 153 read with Section 144C of the Act. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed.
- Vatika Seven Elements Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ACIT Circle 25(1), New DelhiDelhi29 Jan 2026Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the final assessment order was barred by limitation as per Section 153 read with Section 144C of the Act. Consequently, the impugned assessment order was quashed.
- Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ACIT Circle 13(1), New DelhiDelhi29 Jan 2026Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the impugned final assessment orders were barred by limitation as per Section 153 read with Section 144C of the Act. The assessment orders were quashed on this limited legal issue.
- Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle…Delhi29 Jan 2026Allowed
Also relies on CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the assessment orders were barred by limitation as per Section 153 read with Section 144C of the Act, following the Madras High Court's judgment and coordinate bench decisions. The impugned orders ...
More judgments on Section 144C(13)
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Autoform Sales Gmbh, Hyderabad vs ADIT (International Taxation) - 1, HyderabadITA 486/HYD/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Autoform Sales Gmbh, Hyderabad vs ADIT (International Taxation) - 1, HyderabadITA 498/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2128/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4558/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
