← 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

Aravindan Rengasamy, Chennai vs. ACIT (International Taxation), Madurai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 3297/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3297/Chny/2025 & S.A No.115/Chny/2025 िनधा%रण वष% /Assessment Year: 2019-20 Aravindan Rengasamy, The Asst. Commissioner Of Income C/O. Sundaram & Narayanan, Vs. Tax (International Taxation), Chartered Accountants, Madurai. 18 Balaiah Avenune, Luz Churchroad, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. Pan: Apupr 6827B

For Appellant: Mr.K. Meenakshi Sundaram, C.A *+For Respondent: Ms. E.Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 127Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69

assessee did not file the return of income. The A.O issued notices calling on the assessee to furnish details. The A.O passed the draft assessment order stating that the assessee has not made any submissions with regard to the various financial transactions and therefore, the entire transactions are added ... unexplained. The assessee filed a Writ Petition against the draft assessment order of the A.O before the Hon'ble Madras High Court (W.P No.13936 of 2024 dated 27.06.2024) and the Hon'ble High Court has remitted the case back to the A.O to pass a fresh order on merits

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, Delhi vs. Pankaj Goel, Delhi

ITA 4159/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Sh. Pankaj Goel, Income Tax, 662/3A, Ghati Road, Central Circle-3, Anand Paravt, Central Delhi, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aswpg8949E (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.236/Del/2025 [Arising Out Of Ita No.4159/Del/2025] Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Pankaj Goel, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 662/3A, Ghati Road, Tax, Anand Paravt, Central Circle-3, Central Delhi, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aswpg8949E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Mansi Jain, Adv. Sh. Siddharth Bajaj, Adv. Department By Sh. Siddharth Bhim Singh Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.12.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.4159/Del/2025 Along With Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No. 236/Del/2025 For Assessment & C.O. No.236/Del/2025

Section 13ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 29A

No.236/Del/2025 151. Hence, the orders under section 148A(d) and the notices under section 148 are quashed. As a corollary, the draft assessment orders under section 144B/144C cannot survive and are also quashed. 16. These writ petitions are allowed on the above terms. There will be no order

Marelli Um Electronic Systems Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax/ Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with a direction to grant

ITA 5805/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklamarelli Um Electronic Vs. Dcit/Assessment Unit, Systems Private Limited Income Tax Department 402, Sector-8, Imt Circle 16(1) Manesar Gurugram, Delhi, Cr Building Gurgaon – 122051 Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcm8906R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Aditya Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

year, is to be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for A. Y. 2021-22. 6. Therefore, the draft assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B r.w.s 144C(1) of the Act for A.Y. 2021-22 was served to the assessee on 20.12.2023 with proposed ... warranty and opportunity of thirty (30) days was given to the assessee for filing his objections or accept this order. Aggrieved by this draft assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B r.w.s 144C(1) of the I.T. Act, the assessee filed a petition before the Dispute resolution panel

Eli Lilly and Company (India) Private Ltd., Haryana vs. ACIT Circle-1(1), Haryana

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

ITA 973/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year:2018-19] Eli Lilly & Company Assistant Commissioner Of Income (India) Private Limited (‘Eli Tax, Circle-1(1), Haryana, Lilly India”) Vs Additional/Joint/Deputy/Income Plot No.92, Sector-32, Tax Officer/National Faceless Institutional Area, Jharsa, Appeal Centre, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 New Delhi Pan Aaace8901F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri K. M. Gupta, Adv. & Shri Jaskaran Singh, Ar Revenue By Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.12.2025

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 270ASection 92C(3)Section 92D

assessee filed objection before the DRP-1, New Delhi, wherein the assessee had filed objections before the DRP, New Delhi against the Draft Assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble DRP has issued certain directions dated 15/02/2022 in the instant case giving the following directions

M/S Scania Commercial Vehicles India Pvt Ltfd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

The Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 261/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 92C

777/Bang/2022 is filed for Assessment Year 2018-19 against the Assessment Order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer on 30.07.2021 by way of draft Assessment Order and subsequently by final Assessment Order dated 08.07.2022 wherein the returned losses of the Assessee of Rs. 1,74,51,63,826/- is assessed ... only attracted for the consideration for issue of shares as received from a resident. However, the Assessing Officer, in the draft Assessment Order made the above computation. The fair market value of shares as per rule 11UA of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer also when questioned the Assessee

Ca (Singapore) Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee partly allowed

ITA 2078/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Girish Agrawalca(Singapore) Pte Ltd., The Assistant Vs. C/O Ca (India) Technologies Commissioner Of India Private Limited, Income Tax, S1 Wipro Sez, International Taxation, Doddathogur Village, Circle2 (1)(1), Begur Hobli, Mumbai. Electronic City, Bangalore-560100. [Pan :Aahcc8349Q] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ajit Jain, With Shri, Siddesh Chaugule, Ars Respondent By: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.12.2025 O R D E R Per Suchitra Kamble:

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, with Shri, Siddesh Chaugule, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 270ASection 274

DTAA read with Section 9(1)(vii) of the Indian Income Tax Act 1961 to be taxed at applicable rates. As against the 'Draft Assessment Order the assessee filed objections before the Disputes Resolution Panel-1(WZ), Mumbai on 29/04/2024 vide objection number 115364/2024-25 dated 29.09.2024, Mumbai. The objections filed ... before the DRP. 5.2 It was noticed that subject to the narration of the facts mentioned above in the draft assessment order and considering the directions of the DRP, the total income of the assesse is computed as under: Sr.No. Particulars Amount INR 1. Income

Trishul Homes & Infrastructure Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-31, Delhi

In the result, both these appeals are allowed

ITA 502/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.501 & 502/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2017-18 बनाम Trishul Homes & Infrastructure Dcit, Private Limited, Vs. Central Circle-31, Delhi. 101-102, 3 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaect5592R अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144BSection 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 250

under 153D of the Act, 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 ... leave no room for doubt that approval with respect to "each assessment year" is to be obtained by the Assessing Officer on the draft assessment order before passing the assessment order under Section 153A." 12. It is observed that the Court in the case ofSapna Gupta (supra) refused to interdict

Trishul Homes & Infrastructure Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-31, Delhi

In the result, both these appeals are allowed

ITA 501/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.501 & 502/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2017-18 बनाम Trishul Homes & Infrastructure Dcit, Private Limited, Vs. Central Circle-31, Delhi. 101-102, 3 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaect5592R अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144BSection 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 250

under 153D of the Act, 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 ... leave no room for doubt that approval with respect to "each assessment year" is to be obtained by the Assessing Officer on the draft assessment order before passing the assessment order under Section 153A." 12. It is observed that the Court in the case ofSapna Gupta (supra) refused to interdict

Damandeep Kaur, Mohali vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Chandigarh

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 902/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

ground that the Assessing Officer failed to follow the mandatory procedure laid down u/s 144C of the Act by not issuing a draft assessment order, despite the assessee being an “eligible assessee" within the meaning of section 144C(15)(b), being a non-resident during the respective years. Since this ... transfer-pricing cases and one for any non-resident assessee. It was emphasized that the AO having proposed variations prejudicial to the assessee, draft assessment order u/s 144C(1) became mandatory. 13. It was submitted that the failure to issue a draft order renders the assessment void ab initio

Damandeep Kaur, Mohali vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Chandigarh

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 901/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2019-20
Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

ground that the Assessing Officer failed to follow the mandatory procedure laid down u/s 144C of the Act by not issuing a draft assessment order, despite the assessee being an “eligible assessee" within the meaning of section 144C(15)(b), being a non-resident during the respective years. Since this ... transfer-pricing cases and one for any non-resident assessee. It was emphasized that the AO having proposed variations prejudicial to the assessee, draft assessment order u/s 144C(1) became mandatory. 13. It was submitted that the failure to issue a draft order renders the assessment void ab initio

Damandeep Kaur, Mohali vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Chandigarh

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 900/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

ground that the Assessing Officer failed to follow the mandatory procedure laid down u/s 144C of the Act by not issuing a draft assessment order, despite the assessee being an “eligible assessee” within the meaning of section 144C(15)(b), being a non-resident during the respective years. Since this ... transfer-pricing cases and one for any non-resident assessee. It was emphasized that the AO having proposed variations prejudicial to the assessee, draft assessment order u/s 144C(1) became mandatory. 13. It was submitted that the failure to issue a draft order renders the assessment void ab initio

Damandeep Kaur, Mohali vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Chandigarh

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 899/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

ground that the Assessing Officer failed to follow the mandatory procedure laid down u/s 144C of the Act by not issuing a draft assessment order, despite the assessee being an “eligible assessee" within the meaning of section 144C(15)(b), being a non-resident during the respective years. Since this ... transfer-pricing cases and one for any non-resident assessee. It was emphasized that the AO having proposed variations prejudicial to the assessee, draft assessment order u/s 144C(1) became mandatory. 13. It was submitted that the failure to issue a draft order renders the assessment void ab initio

Bharati Nimba Patil, Nashik vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 503/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.503/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Bharati Nimba Patil, Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi. S. No.235, P. No.53, 54, Shri Datta Krupa Kalanagar Mhasarul, Behind Aakash Petrol Pump, Nashik- 422004. Pan : Akapp7755P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanket M. Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By : Shri Bharat Andhale (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1] The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal In Limine & Thereby Confirming The Addition Of Rs.48,75,000 Made By The A.O. In The Ex-Parte Asst. Order U/S 144 R.Ws. 147 Passed During Covid Period, By Taxing The Entire Consideration Received On Sale Of Agricultural Land As Stcg Without Verifying The Contention Raised In Form 35 That The Impugned Land Was Rural Agricultural

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M. Joshi (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale (Virtual)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)

Rs.48,75,000/- as her share out of the sale proceeds. Accordingly, notices u/s 148 and 142(1) and show cause notices and draft assessment order respectively were issued to the assessee. However, the assessee did not reply to any of the above notices and consequently the Assessing Officer completed

Sreesharada Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd, Udupi vs. ITO Ward- 1&Tps, Udupi

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1316/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 80

income from other sources and not business income. Therefore a show cause notice was issued to the assessee in the form of the draft assessment order stating that though the interest income received by the assessee is 28,18,393/– but the assessee has claimed deduction under section

Sreesharada Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd, Udupi vs. ITO Ward- 1&Tps, Udupi

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1315/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 80

income from other sources and not business income. Therefore a show cause notice was issued to the assessee in the form of the draft assessment order stating that though the interest income received by the assessee is 28,18,393/– but the assessee has claimed deduction under section

Compunnel Technology India (P) Ltd, Noida vs. ACIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 550/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year:2016-17] Compunnel Technology India Assistant Commissioner Of Income Private Limited, Tax, Circle-4(2), C-4, Sector-58, Noida, Vs New Delhi Uttar Pradesh-201301 Pan Aaaci5095A Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Dinesh Gupta, Ar Revenue By Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15.12.2025

Section 144Section 92CSection 92D

Rs.56,51,710/- was filed on 18.11.2016. The ld. AO, after incorporating adjustments made by the learned Transfer Pricing Officer, issued a draft assessment order to the assessee proposing assessed income of Rs.8,21,94,920/-. The learned Transfer Pricing Officer made adjustments in as much as against, CUP method ... adopted by assessee it choose, to opt for TNMM for his TP study. The ld. DRP partly confirmed the draft assessment order, leading to determination of taxable income of Rs.7,59,14,326/- vide order under section 143(3) r.w.s.144C dated 31.03.2021. 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently

Tmeic Industrial Systems India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 898/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.898/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S. Tmeic Industrial Vs. Dy.Cit Systems India Private Limited Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadct5493J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.As, K. C. Devdas, Kranthi Palivela & Mrudulatha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Smt. U. Mini Chandran, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: C.As, K. C. Devdas, KranthiFor Respondent: Smt. U. Mini Chandran, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 254

assessees governed by section 153 of the Act. Under the special regime of section 144C of the Act, the assessee may accept the draft assessment order and file appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) or object Page 12 of 37 ITA No 898 of 2024 TMEIC Industrial Systems India ... There is also no dispute about the facts that the final assessment order was passed by the Ld. AO on 29.07.2024, the draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(1) of the Act was passed on 29.09.2023, and the directions of Ld. DRP under section 144C

Gainsight Software Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-2(1), Hydersabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

ITA 796/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92D

respect of international transactions pertaining to software development services. 4. Thereafter, the A.O. has passed the draft assessment order under Section 144C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 20.09.2023, determining the total income after considering the TP adjustment proposed by the Ld. TPO. In the draft order ... vide letter dated 18.10.2023, informed the Faceless Assessment Unit that objections had been filed before the Hon’ble Dispute Resolution Panel against the draft assessment order. The Hon’ble DRP, after considering the objections filed by the assessee, issued directions under Section 144C(5) of the Act on 03.06.2024, wherein

Dsm Shared Services India Private Limited, Hyderabad, Telangana vs. DCIT., Circle 8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1358/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1358/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Dsm Shared Services India Private Limited, The Dcit, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – 500 081. Hyderabad – 500 081. Vs. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aadcd8407C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Aliasgar Rampurawala राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA Aliasgar RampurawalaFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 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 objections before the DRP or to the Assessing Officer for going ... 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

Western Up Tollway Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle -8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 67/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Tp Nos.67/Hyd/2022 & 493/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/S Western Up Tollway Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, New Delhi Income Tax, Circle 8(1) Pan:Aaacw6002B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Tp No. 170/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Mahua Bharatpur Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Expressways Ltd, Income Tax, Circle 5(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaecm4426F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Ajay Vohra & Ananya Kapoor राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. U. Mini Chandran, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Three Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Western Up Tollway Ltd (2) & Mahua Bharatpur Expressways Ltd (1) (“The Page 1 Of 38

For Appellant: Advocates Ajay Vohra & AnanyaFor Respondent: : Smt. U. Mini Chandran, CIT (DR)
Section 270ASection 92CSection 92C(3)

There is also no dispute about the facts that the final assessment order was passed by the Ld. AO on 12.01.2022, the draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(1) of the Act was passed on 31.03.2021, and the directions of Ld. DRP under section 144C ... 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