← All Phrases

“draft assessment order”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144CSection 144C4,773 judgments

The decision most relied on for draft assessment order is ACIT v. Serajuddin & Co. (454 ITR 312), cited in 580 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on draft assessment order

ACIT v. Serajuddin & Co.
454 ITR 312 · 2023 · High Court
580
citing judgments

Approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act is mandatory for assessment orders in search cases. While elaborate reasons for approval are not required, the approving authority must provide some indication that it has examined the draft orders and found them to meet the requirements of law.

Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Subodh Agarwal
149 Taxmann.com 373 · 2023 · High Court
194
citing judgments

Approval of draft assessment orders under Section 153D must be granted with due application of mind, not mechanically. Approving multiple cases, such as 38 in a single day, without proper scrutiny amounts to mechanical approval, rendering the assessment invalid.

Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. v. DRP
369 ITR 113 · 2014 · High Court
140
citing judgments

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.

ESPN Star Sports Mauritius S.N.C. ET Compagnie v. Union of India
388 ITR 383 · 2016 · High Court
71
citing judgments

Failure to issue a draft assessment order under Section 144C(1) makes the final assessment order illegal and beyond jurisdiction. Non-compliance with Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) directions renders the final assessment order bad in law.

JCB India Ltd. v. DCIT
398 ITR 189 · 2017 · High Court
49
citing judgments

The requirement to pass a draft assessment order under Section 144C of the Act is mandatory. A final assessment order issued without such a draft order is a nullity, constituting an incurable jurisdictional error that cannot be saved by Section 292B, even in set-aside proceedings following an ITAT remand.

Aggarwal v. NFAC
127 Taxmann.com 637 · High Court
34
citing judgments

Denying a personal hearing when specifically requested, especially after a search and during a pandemic, violates the principles of natural justice. The assessment and appellate proceedings themselves were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hire Purchase (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC
128 Taxmann.com 190 · High Court
34
citing judgments

Failure to grant a personal hearing to an assessee when income is likely to be varied based on submitted evidence violates the principles of natural justice and renders the assessment order invalid.

Chandrakant Dharia v. ITO
469 ITR 262 · Reported
34
citing judgments

An adverse assessment order cannot be passed without granting an opportunity of personal hearing to the taxpayer. Where income is to be varied based on evidence, a personal hearing is mandatory.

Judgments citing draft assessment order

Arunkumar Ramalakshmi, Erode vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2960/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2960/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arunkumar Ramalakshmi, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, D1, Garudha Apartment, Ishwarya Ward 2(1), Garden, Villarasampatti, Erode. Erode 638 107. [Pan:Ankpr7159Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. We Find No Representation On Behalf Of The Assessee Or Any Application Filed Seeking Adjournment. Thus, The Assessee Called Absent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 148

issued by the ld. CIT(A). 5. We note that the Assessing Officer issued show cause notice dated 19.08.2021 in the form of draft assessment order requesting the assessee to furnish various details as stated at para 8 of the assessment order. On perusal of the assessment order as well

T.M. Handlooms Private Limited, Sellur, Madurai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-2, Income Tax Office, Madurai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2553/CHNY/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2552 & 2553/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 T.M. Handlooms Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 4, Ahimsapuram Fourth Street, Income Tax, Sellur, Madurai 625 002. Corporate Circle 2, Madurai. [Pan:Aabct6418R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 28.11.2023 & 03.11.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

assessment order. Since the assessee company did not file any return of income till 24.12.2018, the Assessing Officer served on the assessee a draft assessment order based on the details available on record. In response, the assessee filed its objection by taking a plea that no notice under section

T.M Handlooms Private Limited, Sellur, Madurai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-2, Income Tax Office, Madurai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2552/CHNY/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2552 & 2553/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 T.M. Handlooms Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 4, Ahimsapuram Fourth Street, Income Tax, Sellur, Madurai 625 002. Corporate Circle 2, Madurai. [Pan:Aabct6418R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 28.11.2023 & 03.11.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

assessment order. Since the assessee company did not file any return of income till 24.12.2018, the Assessing Officer served on the assessee a draft assessment order based on the details available on record. In response, the assessee filed its objection by taking a plea that no notice under section