← 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

Income Tax Officer, Wrd-1, Bhimavaram vs. Yendangandhi Large Sized Co-Operative Society Ltd, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 243/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.243/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Income Tax Officer Vs. M/S Yendagandhi Large Sized Ward-1 Co-Operative Society Ltd. Bhimavaram D.No.4-13, K.K.Road Yendagandi, West Godavari Dist [Pan : Aacat0967G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.01/Viz/2023 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.243/Viz/2022) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) M/S Yendagandhi Large Sized Co- Income Tax Officer Operative Society Ltd. Ward-1 D.No.4-13, K.K.Road Bhimavaram Yendagandi, West Godavari Dist [Pan : Aacat0967G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Madhukar Aves, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 10.10.2023 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], National Faceless

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)

assessee in providing credit facilities to it’s members. Therefore, the AO issued a show cause letter dated 01.02.2021 and a draft assessment order proposing to disallow the deduction to the extent 4 I.T.A. No.243/Viz/2022 & CO No.01/Viz/2023, A.Y.2018-19 Yendagandhi Large Sized Co-operative Society Ltd., West Godavari Dist. of interest ... dividend income under the head income from other sources u/s 56 of the Act. In response to the show cause letter and the draft assessment order, the assessee furnished it’s objections vide letter dated 01.02.2021, submitting that the District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. is also formed under the State

Juniper Networks International B.V, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) Circle-3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 889/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 889/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Juniper Networks बिधम/ Dcit (It) Circle-3(1)(1) International B.V., Mumbai Room No.1605, Vs. C/O Asmita Dsouza, Dhruva 16Th Floor, Air India Advisors Llp, 1101, One Building, Nariman Point, World Center, 11Th Floor, Mumbai-400021. Tower 2B, 841 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road (West), Mumbai- 400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcj0974G (अपीलार्थी /Assessee) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sandeep Bhalla/Prachi Mehta/Asmita Dsouza/Bhavesh Jindal Revenue By: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer (Ao) Dated 31.01.2023 Passed U/S 143(3)/263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) After Giving Effect To The Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Direction U/S 144C(5) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla/PrachiFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 263Section 4

assessee, since the foundation on the basis of which AO framed the impugned reassessment has been quashed, all consequent actions including passing of draft assessment order dated 31.03.2022 and DRP direction dated 20.10.2022 & 07.11.2022 as well as the passing of the impugned assessment order 3 A.Y. 2014-15 Juniper Networks