HONDA TRADING ASIA COMPANY LIMITED,THAILAND vs. DCIT, INT. TAXATION, NOIDA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the final assessment order was passed beyond the prescribed limitation period and was liable to be quashed. However, other issues raised by the assessee were kept open pending the Supreme Court's decision.
What were the facts?
The assessee contended that the final assessment order was time-barred as it was passed beyond the statutory limitation prescribed under Section 153(1) read with Section 153(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue sought deferral of adjudication due to the pendency of a similar issue before the Supreme Court.
What were the issues?
Whether the final assessment order was passed within the statutory time limit prescribed under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The impact of a pending Supreme Court case on the adjudication of the limitation issue.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)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
- Tej International Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (90 citing69 TTJ 650 · 2000 · ITAT
- Tej International Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT64 citing118 Taxmann 59 · 2001 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The captioned appeal is filed by the Assessee challenging the Final Assessment Order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r. Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act in short) dated 30/08/2024 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Assessee raised Ground No. 2.1 contending that the Final Assessment order dated 30/08/2024 passed by the A.O. is time barred by limitation and is bad in law, as it has been passed beyond the time frame prescribed under section 153(1) read with section
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.
More judgments on Section 153
- 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
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3228/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Zabuben Mepabhai Bharvad, Ahmedabad vs The PCIT - 1, AhmedabadITA 1233/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 3453/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026