“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

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

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

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

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

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

Yogender Kumar Garg, Muzaffarnagar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2910/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: or at the time of hearing of appeal.

Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 68

Dated: 30/12/2016 Yogender Kumar Garg vs. ITO To, The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range, Aayakar Bhawan, Bhainsali Ground, Meerut. Sir, Sub: Draft assessment orders u/s 153A/153C/143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 in Apple Group (D.O.S 11/11/2014)- Approval u/s 153D of the I.T. Act, 1961- regarding. Please find ... Iron Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., AAHCA8642G 2010-11 to 2013-14 M/S Mastermind Trade-in-Private Ltd AAECM9435E 2009-10 to 2015-16 18 Draft assessment order received Late i.e. on 31/12/2016 YOurs sincerely Beyond the time as per internal Action Plan. And thus having a very little time/ almost

Yogender Kumar Garg, Muzaffarnagar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2909/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: or at the time of hearing of appeal.

Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 68

Yogender Kumar Garg, Muzaffarnagar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2908/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: or at the time of hearing of appeal.

Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 68

Nilgiri Dist Palantation Workers Coop Thirft and Credit Society J 188, Nilgiri vs. ITO, Ward 1, Ooty

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1427/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1427/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Nilgiri Dist. Plantation Workers Co- The Ito, Op. Thrift & Credit Society J188, Ward-1, Rokby, Coonoor, Ooty, The Nilgiris-643 102. Christo Building, Ii Floor, State Bank Road, Ootacamund-643 001. [Pan: Aaban 4395 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms.N.V.Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.D.Praveen, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

with the assessment process, albeit, under the provisions of Section 144B of the Act. Needless to add, if a show cause notice-cum-draft assessment order is served on the petitioner, an opportunity would be given to the petitioner to file its response/objections to the same. Furthermore, if there

Sunil Kumar Nayak, Jhunjhunu vs. Circle (International Taxation), Jaipur

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

ITA 148/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Ld. Ao.

For Appellant: Sh. Anoop Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69

that the assessee made an investment of Rs. 1,49,81,040/- for purchase of cryptocurrency. Based on this observation the draft assessment order was issued on 22.03.2023. 4. Against this draft assessment order, the assessee filed objections before Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), the direction of the DRP in this

Astrazeneca Pharma India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 284/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Sri Nikhil Tiwari, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

employee stock Compensation Plan. The ld. AO had pressed to disallow the assessee’s claim of expenses at Rs.44,88,471/- in the draft assessment order. The ld. IT(TP)A No.284/Bang/2021 M/s. AstraZeneca Pharma India Limited, Bangalore Page 7 of 37 AO observed that E-SOP expenses claimed

Snc Lavalin Inc., Delhi vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int. Tax 3(1)(2), Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is allowed, the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 3691/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

r.w.s 144C of the Act: 5. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Tax-3(1)(1), Delhi issued draft assessment order u/s 144C(1) of the Act dated December 27, 2022 wherein the AO proposed an addition of Rs. 7,41,83,452 in relation to above amount ... charges) alleging it to be taxable as FIS under the provisions of the Act and India-Canada DTAA. 6. Aggrieved by the draft assessment order, the assessee filed objections before the ld. DRP on January 23, 2023. The ld. DRP passed its directions on September 13, 2023, affirming the action

Sher Singh, Palampur vs. Income Tax Officer, Palampur

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

ITA 664/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 272A(1)(d)

which is taxed as per provisions of section 115BBE of Income tax Act, 1961. 4.1 A show cause notice dated 22/03/2022 along with draft assessment order with above proposed addition/modification was sent to assessee and compliance date was fixed on 28/03/2022. Assessee has replied on 28/03/2022. Assessee has reiterated ... income tax act, 1961 as unexplained money and taxed as per provisions of section 115BBE i.e taxed @ 60% as discussed in draft assessment order is hereby confirmed. Penalty proceedings u/s 271 AAC(1) is also initiated for addition of Rs.44,70,000/- which is taxed as per provisions of section

Tata International Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(3), Mumbai

ITA 2232/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Dhivya Ruth J., Ld. DR

Section 14Section 144CSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 57

made to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to compute the arm's length prices of the international transactions of the assessee. Thereafter a draft assessment order was issued to the assessee vide dated 14.03.2013 wherein income was assessed at Rs. 64,59,34,830/- under the normal provisions ... Crore as per the provisions of section 115JB of the Act. 3. Against this draft assessment order passed u/s. 144C (1) of the Act, assessee has filed objections before the Ld. DRP-II, Mumbai. Ultimately, considering the directions of Ld. DRP-II, Mumbai, the assessment order of the assessee

Ares Diversified, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Intl. Taxation 1(1)(1), New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 2372/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(4)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 3

Counsel has submitted that the final assessment order has not been passed in the statutory period of 30 days of the draft assessment order. Reliance was placed on the a co-ordinate bench decision in case of Mavenir UK Holdings Vs ACIT, New Delhi, ITA No. 185/DEL/2023 order dated 05/01/2024 ... Section 144C(2) is the filing of the objections by the assessee with the Dispute Resolution Panel, if he is not accepting the draft assessment order. The said provision also contemplates filing of such objection before the Assessing Officer as well. If such objection is filed in time, then

Ares Diversified, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Intl. Taxation 1(1)(1), New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 2371/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(4)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 3

Indiyaa Distribution Network LLP, Indore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Indore

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

ITA 258/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2018-19 Indiyaa Distribution Dy. Cit, Network Llp, 1(1), 11D, Sampat Farm, Indore. Opp.Agrawal Public बनाम/ School, Vs. Bicholi Mardana Road, Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aarfg1302N Assessee By Ms.Ruchira Singhal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2024

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

after the case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny in e-Assessment Scheme 2019. However, the AO has not issued the draft assessment order as well as the show cause notice to the assessee before finalizing the assessment. Thus, the Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee has submitted ... clause (xiv) and (xvi) of the Clause 2 of the said Notification, the AO is required to issue a draft assessment order and an opportunity is required to be given to the assessee in case any variation prejudicial to the interests of the assessee is proposed in the draft assessment

Bnp Paribas, Mumbai vs. ACIT (It), Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4449/MUM/2023[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satyapal Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 148Section 2

Article 13 of the IndiaFrance Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (‘DTAA’) read with clause 7 of the Protocol to the DTAA. The AO vide draft assessment order did not agree with the submissions of the assessee and held that the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Sumitomo Mitsui

DCIT 3(4), Mumbai vs. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2477/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: S/Shri Porus F.Kaka & Manish KanthFor Respondent: Ms.Dhivya Ruth J, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI Before Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Accountant Member & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

Tata Consultance Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu-1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2413/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: S/Shri Porus F.Kaka & Manish KanthFor Respondent: Ms.Dhivya Ruth J, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)

above, the A.O. proposed disallowance of ₹ 32,42,666/- on account of subscription paid by the assessee to Tata Sons Ltd. in the draft assessment order against which objection was filed by the assessee before the DRP. The DRP found the objection of the assessee to be unsustainable keeping ... group, a similar subscription paid by the assessee company to Tata Sons Ltd. was proposed to be disallowed by the A.O. in the draft assessment order for A.Y. 2008-09 and when the assessee objected to the said disallowance before the DRP by relying on the decision of the Tribunal

Neha Singh, Lucknow vs. ITO-3(2), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 23/LKW/2024[217-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 115BSection 129Section 142Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 69D

instructions contained in para sub para (2) of para 4 of CBDT Notification No. 61/2019/F.No. 370149/154/2019-TPL dated 12th September, 2019. 14. Because the Draft Assessment order has never been supplied to the appellant by the LAO before passing the final Assessment order dated 01-10-2019. 15. Because the appellant

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Delhi vs. Adm Agro Industries Kot & Akola Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 839/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri R.K. Kapoor, CA

Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 92C

hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). As per the provisions of said section, the Assessing Officer is mandatorily required to pass draft assessment order before passing final assessment order u/s. 144C(3) of the Act, where no objections are filed by the assessee. The CIT(A) has allowed assessee ... their submissions. 8. The undisputed fact is that the Assessing Officer has passed the final assessment order dated 28.03.2013, without passing any draft assessment order. The provisions of Section 144C of the Act were inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 with retrospective effect from 01.04.2009. A bear perusal

Six Continents Hotels, Inc., Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle 3(1)(2) Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3339/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 144(10)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(vii)

third- party Indian hotels to IHG India. Assessment Order and ld. DRP directions for A.Y. 2021-22 13. The AO passed the draft assessment order for A.Y. 2021-22 u/s144C(1) of the Act dated 22.12.2022 on the same line as in A.Y. 2012-13 onwards, alleging that marketing ... relation to Travel Agent Commission (‘TACP’) amounting to Rs.1,23,46,336/- received from third-party Indian hotels. 13 22. In the draft assessment order as well as in the final assessment order, the AO disallowed this amount by observing as under:- “15. In respect of the reimbursement

Oakton Global Technology Services Centre (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-16(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 309/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.309/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Oakton Global Technology Vs. Income Tax Officer Services Centre (India) (P) Ltd, Ward 16(3) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaaco8824H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bhardwaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bhardwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, DR

Section 143(3)Section 144(5)

proposed addition of Rs.89,45,401/-. In pursuant to the TP adjustment as suggested by the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer has passed draft assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA(3) on 29.02.2016 and made addition towards TP adjustment suggested by the TPO. The Assessing Officer had also made ... back and disallowance of professional tax payable u/s 43B of the I.T. Act, 1961. 5. The assessee has filed its objection against the draft assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer before the DRP- Bengaluru. The DRP vide its direction issued u/s 144C(5) of the Act dated 25.10.2016 rejected

ITO Int Taxn Ward, Tuticorin Chennai vs. Shri Abdul Rahman Viswa Abdul Salam, Chennai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 654/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.654/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2014-15 Income-Tax Officer, Shri Abdul Rahman Viswas Abdul International Taxation Ward, Salam, No.64/114, Kalvath Nayagam Tuticorin, Tamil Nadu Street, Kadayanallur, Tenkasi Dist, Tn-627751 [Pan: Apppa9666L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.Abhishek Murali, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024

For Appellant: Mr.Abhishek Murali, CAFor Respondent: Shri ARV Srinivasan, Addl.CIT

Section 129Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144C(2)Section 147Section 250

accrued or arised due is also added to the return of income under the head income from other sources for Rs.4,27,374/-. Draft assessment order was passed on 31-03-2022 and served manually on 01-04-2022. Section 144C(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, On receipt