← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Incometax, Corporate Circle-1 1, Chennai vs. Flextronics Technologies India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 3016/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3016/Chny/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Flextronics Technologies India Tax, Private Limited, Corporate Circle-1(1), Plot No.3, Phase Ii Sipcot Industrial Chennai. Park, Sandavellure C Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Chennai-602 106 [Pan: Aaacf5248E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Co No.5 /Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 Flextronics Technologies India Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Plot No.3, Phase Ii Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle-1(1), Park, Sandavellure C Village, Chennai. Sriperumbudur Taluk, Chennai-602 106 [Pan: Aaacf5248E] अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.P.Lalith Kumar, Ca & Mr.S.Sripal, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, Cit

For Appellant: Mr.P.Lalith Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, CIT
Section 144Section 144C(1)

have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is an undisputed fact on records that the draft assessment order dated 19.12.2016 was passed by the Ld.AO u/s 144 ex-parte given total non-compliance by the assessee. We have noted that originally appeal

Lm Wind Power As, Denmark vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4280/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Lm Wind Power As, Vs, Acit, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (Pan :Aabcl8590Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri Arpitgoyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 29.07.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (He Act") For Assessment Year 2020-21 Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.81,14, 14,893 Is Bad In Law, Void- Ab-Initio & Therefore, Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Set Aside.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 271ASection 44DSection 5Section 92C

present assessment year 2020-21, income of Rs.64,16,57,700 was offered to tax. 2.2 He submitted that in the draft assessment order dated 29.09.2023, the assessing officer made addition of Rs.16,97,57,193 to the returned income of the assessee, being sales commission received by the assessee ... under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act. 2.4 He submitted that computation of assessed income of the assessee in the draft assessment order is as under: 5 Particulars Amount (inRs.) Returned income under the head ‘profit and gains 64,16,57,700 from business or profession