How many judgments cite Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP?

140 judgments on BharatTax cite Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP (369 ITR 113), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 144C, Section 144C(1), Section 153C, Section 132, Section 147, Section 9(1).

Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP

369 ITR 113High Court2014#723 most cited

What is Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP authority for?

Passing a final assessment order under Section 143(3) directly, without first issuing a draft assessment order under Section 144C(1) for an eligible assessee, constitutes a fundamental jurisdictional defect. This defect cannot be cured by a subsequent corrigendum, especially if issued beyond the prescribed period of limitation.

140

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP · Section 144C(1) · draft assessment order · final assessment order · Section 143(3) · jurisdictional defect · corrigendum · curing defects · eligible assessee · assessment procedure · limitation period

Also reported as

225 Taxmann 35128 Taxmann.com 426

Sections most often in play

Section 144C Section 144C(1)Section 153C Section 132 Section 147 Section 9(1)Section 143(3)Section 127

Issues it is cited on

section 6(3)(ii)section 144c(15)(b)section 144c(15)section 92ca(3a)section 6(3)section 16a section 3a eligible assessee section 92ca(4)make available condition section 44da section 144c(10)

Judgments citing Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP

Dy. CIT, Circle-8, Pune vs. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Pune

In the result, the Cross objections are partly allowed in so far

ITA 649/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2013 & 1726/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 Pan : Aaaca4074D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…otice of demand. Issue of notice of demand brings down the curtain on the process of assessment. Until notice of demand is issued, the assessment cannot be said to have concluded. 13. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in Vijay Television (P) Ltd. Vs. DRP (2014) 369 ITR 113 (Mad.) was confronted with a situation in which the AO, pursuant to the order of the TPO, passed a final assessment order instead of a draft order. A question arose as to whether the order so passed could be treated as a valid order. Accepting the contention of the assessee, the Hon’ble High Court set aside the order passed by the AO by obser…

Yazaki (I) P Limited, (Formerly Known As Tata Yazaki Autocomp Ltd), Pune vs. ACIT, Circle-7, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 163/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.163/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40Section 40A(2)(a)Section 92C

…at the statute has prescribed a particular procedure to be followed in case some variation is made in the returned income of an eligible assessee defined u/s 144C(15) of the Act. 8. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in Vijay Television (P) Ltd. Vs. DRP (2014) 369 ITR 113 (Mad.) was confronted with a situation in which the AO, pursuant to the order of the TPO, passed 8 Yazaki India Private Limited a final assessment order instead of a draft order. A question arose as to whether the order so passed could be treated as a valid order. Accepting the contention of the assessee, the Hon’ble High Court set aside the…

M/S Inatech India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13

ITA 214/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Surya Narayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

…f Zuari Cements Ltd., (supra), before the Hon’ble Apex Court was dismissed vide order CC 16694/2013 dated 27.09.2013. 5.3.2 We also find that this issue has been decided in the case of Vijay Television (Pvt.) Ltd., Vs. Dispute Resolution Panel, Chennai (2014) 369 ITR 113 (Mad), wherein the Hon’ble Madras High Court has, inter alia, at paras 20 to 24 thereof has held / observed as under: “20. Under Section 144 (C) of the Act, it is evident that the assessing officer is required to pass only a draft assessment order on the basis of the recommendations made by the TPO after giving an opportunity to the assessee to…

Handytankers K/S Agent of F.B. Maersk Tankers C/O Atlantic Shipping Pvt. Ltd., Sikka vs. The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 91/RJT/2016[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 147Section 172(4)

…ntegra inasmuch as Hon'ble Madras High Court, following Hon'ble AP High Court's judgment in the case of Zurai Cement Ltd. v. ACIT (unreported judgment dated 21st February 2013 in WP No. 5557 of 2012) and in the case of Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP [2014] 369 ITR 113/225 Taxman 35/46 taxmann.com 100 (Mad.) has held that such an order will be "null and void". It is also pointed out that a Delhi bench of this Tribunal, in the case of Capsugel Healthcare Ltd. v. Asstt.CIT [2014] 50 taxmann.com 324/152 ITD 142 (Delhi- Trib.) and vice versa also holds so. Learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, sub…

Lr2 Management K/S Agent of Principal Freight Beneficiary, Interocean Shipping (I) Pvt. Ltd., Jamnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, (Inter. Taxa.), Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 276/RJT/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 147Section 172(4)

Lr2 Management K/S (As Foreign Commr. Manager/Agent of Principal Freight Beneficiary, Torm A/S Maersk Tankers Singapore P. Ltd., Sikka vs. The Income Tax Officer, Inter. Taxa., Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 756/RJT/2014[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 147Section 172(4)

Bs Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst.Comissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2186/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Deepak P. Ripote

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 92B

…of the Act by issuing the notice of demand u/s 156 of the Act & penalty notices u/s 271(1)(c) and 271AAB along with draft assessment order dated 30/12/2016, which tantamount to passing of final assessment order: 1. Vijay Television Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DRP, [2014] 369 ITR 113 (Mad.) 2. Capsugel Healthcare Ltd. Vs. ACIT, ITA No. 1356/Del/2012 3. ACIT Vs. Getrag Hi Tech Gears Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 823/Chd/2012. M/s BS Ltd., Hyd. 10. Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities and further submitted that the case laws relied upon by the assessee are not relevant to the present case. 11. Considered…

M/S. Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 535/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No. 535/Pun/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT

Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

…ice was also set aside. The decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court was affirmed by the Supreme Court by the dismissal of the Revenue's SLP (C) [CC No. 16694/2013] on 27th September, 2013. 13. In Vijay Television (P) Ltd. v. Dispute Resolution Panel [2014] 369 ITR 113 (Mad.), a similar question arose. There, the Revenue sought to rectify a mistake by issuing a corrigendum after the final assessment order was passed. Consequently, not only the final assessment order but also the corrigendum issued thereafter was challenged. Following the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Zuari Cement Ltd. v. ACIT (su…

M/S. Eaton Industrial Systems Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 536/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.536/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Eaton Industrial Systems Pvt. Ltd., 145, Off Mumbai Pune Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pimpri, Pune – 411018 …. Pan: Aabce4955C Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 8, Pune

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण पुणे न्यायपीठ “ए” पुणे में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE सुश्री सुषमा चावऱा, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अयिऱ चतुवेदी, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.536/PUN/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/s. Eaton Industrial Systems Pvt. Ltd., 145, Off Mumbai Pune Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pimpri, Pune – 411018 …. PAN: AABCE4955C Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 8, Pune अऩीऱाथी की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Vishal Kalra प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent by : Shri R…

Aalaya Jewel Industry Private Limited, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 971/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Miss S.Deepa, C.A ""For Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT, D.R

Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(4)Section 249(3)Section 253(5)Section 92C

…he time limits, since the objections stood rejected by the ld.DRP without taking into file. Reliance was placed on the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Television P. Ltd., Vs. Dispute Resolution Panel And Others reported in (2014) 369 ITR 113 (Mad.). 6. Per contra ld.D.R submitted that the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer was well within time. According to her, once objections were filed by the assessee and these were considered by the DRP, the time limit for passing the assessment order started to run from the date of the order of the DRP. According to her, by virtue of…

Aalaya Jewel Industry Private Limited, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 970/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Miss S.Deepa, C.A ""For Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT, D.R

Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(4)Section 249(3)Section 253(5)Section 92C

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Sandvik Asia Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 607/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.607/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 10, Pune …. Vs. M/S. Sandvik Asia Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai-Pune Highway, Dapodi, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pune - 411012 Pan: Aaccs6638K

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण पुणे न्यायपीठ “ए” पुणे में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE सुश्री सुषमा चावऱा, न्याययक सदस्य एवं, श्री डी. करुणाकरा राव, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.607/PUN/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 10, Pune …. Vs. M/s. Sandvik Asia Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai-Pune Highway, Dapodi, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pune - 411012 PAN: AACCS6638K आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.465/PUN/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/s. Sandvik Asia Pvt. Lt…

Sandvik Asia Private Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 465/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6131/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Addl. Cit, Special Range-2, M/S. Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd., 418, Naurang House, 21 K.G. Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacb0298A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. & Ms. Vrinda Tulshan, Adv. Respondent By Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 23.11.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153(3)Section 154Section 254Section 271Section 92C

…Ltd, WPC No. 3399/2016; b) Turner International India (P) Ltd Vs. DCIT (2017) 82 taxmann.com 125 (Delhi); c) Control Risk India Private Limited Vs. DCIT WP(C ) No. 5722 of 2017; and d) Vijay Television (P) Limited Vs. Dispute Resolution Panel, Chandni (2014) 369 ITR 113 (Madras) 4. The Ld. CIT(DR), on the other hand, submitted that impugned order was not barred by limitation. 4.1 In respect of the issue that impugned order was passed beyond the period of two years from the end of the month in which the order of the ITAT was received, the Ld. CIT(DR) submitted that the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO/TPO w…

M/S. Globerian India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2265/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: S/Shri Rahul Khare & Rohan Khare, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 144CSection 254

…tice was also set aside. The decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court was affirmed by the Supreme Court by the dismissal of the Revenue's SLP (C) [CC No. 16694/2013] on 27th September, 2013. 13. In Vijay Television (P) Ltd. v. Dispute Resolution Panel [2014] 369 ITR 113 (Mad.), a similar question arose. There, the Revenue sought to rectify a mistake by issuing a corrigendum after the final assessment order was passed. Consequently, not only the final 11 ITA No.2265/Del./2014 assessment order but also the corrigendum issued thereafter was challenged. Following the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Zu…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1458/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1458/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Transworld Garnet India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, V. N/No.334/O/No.46, Mgr Road, Company Circle Iii(2), Kalashetra Colony, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 090. Pan: Aaact3408N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri M. M. Bhusari, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.04.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2017 आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per N.R.S. Ganesan:

For Appellant: Shri M. M. Bhusari, CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate

…Bench initially, the issue was referred to President of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The 2 I.T.A. No. 1458/Mds/2013 President in his capacity as third member found that in view of the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in Vijay Television Pvt. Ltd. 369 ITR 113, an opportunity may be given to the assessee to file application and after the reply filed by the Revenue within three weeks, the matter has to be adjudicated by the Division Bench. Accordingly, the matter was fixed for hearing on the application filed by the assessee. 2. When the application filed by the assessee along with reply was taken up…

Daewon Kang Up Co. Limited, Thiruvallur vs. DDIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 818/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita N0.818/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Lalith Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Muruga Boopathy, Jt. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(15)Section 2Section 3Section 9(1)(vii)

…(DRP), which are required to be disposed by it, and whose decision is binding on the AO. The procedure prescribed having not been observed, the assessment fails, as expressed by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Vijay Television (P) Ltd. v. DRP [2014] 369 ITR 113 (Mad). The ld. DR would submit that the term ‘eligible assessee’ is defined under section 144C (15) as a person in whose case a variation is proposed under section 3 ITA. No.818/Mds/2015 (AY 2010-11) Daewon Kang Up Co. Ltd. v. DDIT 92CA and a foreign company, so that only where both the conditions are satisfied would the person concerned qualify…

M/S. Asian Honda Motor Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

In the result additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6142/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiasian Honda Motor Co. Ltd, Dcit, C/O. Pds Legal Atmaram Int. Taxation Vs. Mansion, Office No. 7, First Floor, Kg Marg, New Delhi Pan:Aaica2531P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri NC Swain, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 271BSection 92(3)Section 92C

…ull and void order is that it is considered as non est, meaning thereby, that it entails all the consequences of not having been passed at all and is ignored for all practical purposes. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP [2014] 369 ITR 113/225 Taxman 35/46 taxmann.com 100 considered a case in which the assessment order was directly passed without routing through draft order or DRP. The Hon'ble Court held it to be a non- curable defect and resultantly the assessment was quashed. It was held that when there is an omission on the part of the AO to follow the mandatory procedure prescr…

M/S. Asian Honda Motor Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6143/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Asian Honda Motor Co. Dcit, Ltd., Intl Taxation, Vs. C/O. Pds Legal New Delhi Atmaram Mansion, Office No.7, First Floor, K.G. Marg, New Delhi Pan:Aaica2531P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 92(3)Section 92C

…ll and void order is that it is considered as non est, meaning thereby, that it entails all the consequences of not having been passed at all and is ignored for all practical purposes. The Hon‟ble Madras High Court in Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. vs. DRP (2014) 369 ITR 113 (Mad) considered a case in which the assessment order was directly passed without routing through draft order or DRP. The Hon‟ble Court held it to be a noncurable defect and resultantly the assessment was quashed. It was held that when there is an omission on the part of the AO to follow the mandatory procedure prescribed under the Act, such an o…

Jazzy Creations P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 4560/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: A Coordinate Bench Of This Tribunal, And, Vide Order Dated 19Th August 2013, The Matter Was Remitted To The File Of The Cit(A) By Observing That, “...We Consider It Appropriate To Restore The Entire Issue Regarding The Tp Adjustment To The File Of The Cit(A) With A Direction To Re-Adjudicate The Same By Taking Into Account The Aforesaid Amendment As Well As Other Grievances On The Assessee On Tp Adjustment By Giving The Assessee A Reasonable Opportunity Of Hearing.....” The Assessee Is Not Satisfied By The Stand Taken By The Cit(A) In The Remanded Proceedings As Well. That Is Why The Assessee Is Once Again In Appeal Before Us.

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…Capsugel Healthcare Limited Vs ACIT and vice versa [(2015) 152 ITD 142 (Del)] :- 7. We find that the issue is covered is now covered in favour in of the assessee by judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court, in the case of Vijay Television Pvt Ltd Vs DRP [(2014) 369 ITR 113 (Mad)] wherein Hon'ble High Court has, inter alia, observed as follows: 20. Under Section 144 (C) of the Act, it is evident that the assessing officer is required to pass only a draft assessment order on the basis of the recommendations made by the TPO after giving an opportunity to the assessee to file their objections and then the assessing of…