SKYBRIDGE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, (TP)-2 HYDERBAD, HYDERABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, due to the assessee's failure to raise objections, is not maintainable before the Tribunal as per Section 253(1)(d). This is because the order was not passed pursuant to directions from the Dispute Resolution Panel.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Skybridge Solutions Private Limited, did not file objections against the draft assessment order. Consequently, the Assessing Officer passed the final assessment order based on the draft order. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal before the ITAT. Specifically, whether an assessment order passed under Section 144C(3) due to non-filing of objections is appealable under Section 253(1)(d).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 144C,Section 253(1)(d),Section 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” , HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER
PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M.
The appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2021-22 arises from the impugned assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act dated 26.12.2023. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a software development and services company, filed its income tax return for the assessment year 2021-22 on 09.03.2022, declaring a total income of Rs.1,06,49,030. The return was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act on 24.08.2022. Subsequently, the case was select
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 144C
- Mishoo Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 19/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
- Anshu Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 18/KOL/2026[2016-2017]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2016-2017
- Anshu Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 17/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Anshu Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 16/KOL/2026[2014-2015]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2014-2015
- Anshu Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 15/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
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