“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

Sushil Goel, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-29, Jhandewalan, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3014/DEL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.3014/Del/2023 (Assessment Year 2020-21)

Section 1Section 115BSection 153Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

JCIT/CR-8/153D/2021- 22/1354 dt. 30.9.2021 wherein JCIT has not referred as to for which order, approval was granted i.e. no reference of any draft assessment order was made in the approval letter and thus it is a mechanical approval granted without application of mind. Ld. AR submits that it appears that ... draft assessment order was sent ITA Nos.3488/ & 3490Del/2023 Sushil Goel vs. DCIT by the AO and approval was taken for passing the order u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 10. Ld.AR further submits that from the perusal of the approval, it could be seen that, Adl. CIT while

Sushil Goel, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-29, Jhandewalan, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3013/DEL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.3014/Del/2023 (Assessment Year 2020-21)

Section 1Section 115BSection 153Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Nashik vs. Abhayraj Fattehraj Chordiya, C/O Laxmi Oil Mil

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1045/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Jayant R BhattFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

Assessing Officer and has also failed to consider any seized material which has been relied upon by the Assessing Officer while framing the draft assessment orders. The approval given by the JCIT is mechanical in nature and without application of mind and not in accordance with law. 19. Referring

Krishnakumar Manda, Medchal vs. DCIT., Circle-12(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1017/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 1016 & 1017/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2021-22) Shri Krishnakumar Manda, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Medchal Income Tax Pan:Bmspm9739D Circle 12(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Phaneendra Nag, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Phaneendra Nag, CAFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 2Section 250Section 69

Ld.AO has erred in not following the clauses (xi), (xvi) & (xviii) of Sub section 2 of Section 144B i.e. in not serving the Draft assessment order along with Show Cause notice before finalizing the assessment, which would amount to breach of not only Principles of Natural Justice but also

Krishnakumar Manda, Medchal vs. DCIT., Circle-12(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1016/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Phaneendra Nag, CAFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 2Section 250Section 69

Shakti Hormann Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 917/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.917/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Shakti Hormann Private Limited, Hyderabad. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. Pan: Aadcs4024Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “A.O.”) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”) Dated 25/07/2024 For The

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran

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

assessee's explanation on the issues other than the TP adjustment that was suggested by the TPO. 6. The AO thereafter issued a draft assessment order under section 144C(1) of the Act, dated 26/09/2023, wherein, after incorporating the TP adjustments, he proposed to assess the income of the assessee ... statutory time limit for completion of assessment, even after extension of TP reference, expired on 30/09/2023. The Ld. AR submitted that although the draft assessment order under section 144C(1) of the Act, dated 26/09/2023 was issued on 26/09/2023, the final assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 144C

Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 711/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.711/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2020-2021 Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Circle-3(1), Vs. Pin – 500 081. Hyderabad – 500 081. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aahcs9571J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca P Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)

sec.153. The learned DR has further submitted that as per the special provisions u/sec.144C, the assessee is having an option to accept the Draft Assessment Order and variations in the draft assessment or to object the same by filing 12 ITA.No.711/Hyd./2024 objections before ... Issued the notices. If the contention of the appellants/revenue was to hold some water, they must have passed the draft assessment order immediately on receipt of the order from the Tribunal, but instead, notice was issued by the DRP. In any case, it is a far cry for the revenue

Trinity Enclave P. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1728/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: demonetisation period.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

uncertainty, which is which is pending e-Assessment in your case for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The variations as per the draft assessment order may be seen which are proposed to be made in your case. Draft Assessment Order Assessee company has filed its return of income

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Ms Zyme Solution Private Limited, Bangalore

Accordingly the appeal of the ld. AO and the CO of the assessee are partly allowed,

ITA 1885/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Balusamy, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 92C

margins of the comparable and final margin was derived at 19.23% making an adjustment of Rs.2,87,20,804. Accordingly the draft assessment order was passed on 15.11.2016 and as the assessee did not file objection before the ld. DRP, the final assessment order was passed

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2767/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

2767/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 112/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 111/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 113/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 114/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 115/Mum/2025 6. 1. On receipt of the draft assessment order, the assessee did not respond. The Ld.AO thus filed final assessment order making addition. 7. The assessee then filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A) against final

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2367/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

Rs.2,65,32,914/- The Ld.AO computed the Net total Income at Rs.917,29,45,155/- 6. 1. On receipt of the draft assessment order, the assessee did not respond. The Ld.AO then filed final assessment order making addition. 7. The assessee then filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A) against final

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2366/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

2767/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 112/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 111/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 113/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 114/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 115/Mum/2025 6. 1. On receipt of the draft assessment order, the assessee did not respond. The Ld.AO then filed final assessment order making addition. 7. The assessee then filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A) against final

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years under consideration stands partly allowed and cross appeals filed by the assesse stands dismissed

ITA 2365/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

I.T.A. No. 2767/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 112/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 111/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 113/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 114/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 115/Mum/2025 6.1. On receipt of the draft assessment order, the assessee did not respond. The Ld.AO thus passed final assessment order making addition. 7. The assessee then filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A) against

Sudesh Kumar, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Range 202, Ghaziabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2471/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.& Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year: 2019-20] Sudesh Kumar Dcit, Central Circle 289/1, Katra Peran Range- 202 Tilak Bazar, Delhi-110006 Vs Delhi Pan No. Anjpk1024K Appellant Respondent Assessee By Ms. Priyanka, Ca Revenue By Written Adjournment Application By The Cit (Dr)/ Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2025

Section 115BSection 133ASection 153ASection 153DSection 234ASection 271ASection 69A

granted for draft assessment for passing of assessment order in search cases. According to the Manual, the Assessing Officer should submit the draft assessment order for such approval well in time along with docketed in the order sheet, a copy of the draft assessment order, covering letter filed

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Captial Power Systems Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 864/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 123Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

Assessees and drawing conclusions thereon. Thus, submitted that it is very easy for the ld. ACIT to grant approval of the draft assessment orders since the Ld. ACIT is involved with the assessment proceedings right from the inception. Therefore, submitted that the by contention of the Assessee's Representative that ... 20/05/2024 at 21:34:51 requires the approving authority, i.e. Joint Commissioner to verify the issues raised by the Assessing Officer in the draft assessment order and apply his mind to ascertain as to whether the required procedure has been followed by the Assessing Officer or not in framing