← 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

Aveva Solutions India LLP, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1170/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1170/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year – 2021-2022 Aveva Solutions India The Income Tax Officer, Llp, Hyderabad. Vs. Ward-8(1), Pin – 500 008. Hyderabad – 500 084. Pan Aayfa6913G (Appellant) (Respondent) Sri Percy Perdiwala, Advocate िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Shri Harsh Shah & Ca Karan Jain. राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Shah and CA Karan JainFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 92C

passed on 18.10.2024, therefore, the same is barred by limitation and liable to be quashed. He has further pointed-out that even the Draft Assessment Order passed by the Assessing Officer is not within the period of limitation as provided as it did not allow the period of 30 days ... 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

Mohhamed Abdul Aziz Khalid, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, (Int Taxn)-1, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 65/HYD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.65/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2015-2016) Mohammed Abdul Aziz The Asst. Director Of Khalid, Hyderabad. Vs. Income Tax [Intl. Taxn- Pin – 500 036 1], Pan Awwpk9108R Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca P Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 144CSection 147Section 156

condoned and the matter may be remanded to the record of the DRP for deciding the objections against the Draft Assessment Order on merits. 3. On the other hand, the learned DR has submitted that this appeal is not against he Final Assessment Order passed by the Assessing Officer ... learned DR has further submitted that the DRP called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer and noted the fact that the Draft Assessment Order u/sec.144C of the Act was passed on 13.03.2022 which was also delivered to the assessee on the same date. Therefore, the objections before

Lintas India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 16(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5889/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2021-22 M/S. Lintas India Private Assessment Unit, Limited, Income Tax Department Or A Wing, 16Th Floor, Deputy Commissioner Of Parinee Crescenzo, Income Tax, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Circle 16(1), Bandra (East), 1) National Faceless Mumbai – 400 051 Assessment Centre (Nafac), Vs. Pan: Aaacl0124F Delhi 2)Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, New Marine Lines, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Ajit Jain, Ld. A.R. Shri Karnik Kansara, Ld. A.R Ms. Neha Rai, Ld. A.R. Ms. Sakshi Chimanani, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 22.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.05.2023, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Dispute Resolution Panel-1) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2021-22. 2 M/S. Lintas India Private Limited

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

pursuance to the aforesaid TPO order dated 16.10.2023 u/s 92CA(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer (AO) vide draft assessment order u/s 144(c)(1) of the Act dated 14.11.202, accepted the arm’s length price, as determined by the TPO and consequently added a sum of Rs.8 ... detailed above, to the total income of the Assessee. 4 M/s. Lintas India Private Limited 6. The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said draft assessment order by filing the objections before the Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (in short “Ld. DRP”) u/s 144C of the Act. 7. The Ld. DRP vide

Shell India Markets Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(4), Mumbai

ITA 4828/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nMS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 40Section 92C

segment; (iv) cost allocation charges; and (v) mark-up on recoveries. 3. 1. The Assessing Officer adopted these adjustments in the draft assessment order. The summary of the adjustments, as adopted by the Assessing Officer, is as under: S No. Nature of adjustment 1 Amount (INR) Provision ... Total 536,75,63,935 4. Based on the aforesaid findings of the TPO, the Assessing Officer passed a draft assessment order dated 26 September 2023 under section 144C(1). In addition to incorporating the transfer pricing adjustments, he also made a corporate tax disallowance under section

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 153/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

JCIT. Further, it is a fact that the ld AO had sought for approval u/s 153D of the Act by forwarding the draft assessment order alone for the years under consideration vide letter dated 28.03.2022 upto AY 2019-20 and on 30.03.2022 for AY 2021-22. Evidences in this regard ... same date. On perusal of the aforesaid approval granted u/s 153D of the Act, wherein it has been stated that the draft assessment order as proposed by the ld AO had been amended by the ld JCIT and that the amended draft order has been accorded approval u/s 153D

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 152/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

JCIT. Further, it is a fact that the ld AO had sought for approval u/s 153D of the Act by forwarding the draft assessment order alone for the years under consideration vide letter dated 28.03.2022 upto AY 2019-20 and on 30.03.2022 for AY 2021-22. Evidences in this regard ... same date. On perusal of the aforesaid approval granted u/s 153D of the Act, wherein it has been stated that the draft assessment order as proposed by the ld AO had been amended by the ld JCIT and that the amended draft order has been accorded approval u/s 153D

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 151/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

JCIT. Further, it is a fact that the ld AO had sought for approval u/s 153D of the Act by forwarding the draft assessment order alone for the years under consideration vide letter dated 28.03.2022 upto AY 2019-20 and on 30.03.2022 for AY 2021-22. Evidences in this regard ... same date. On perusal of the aforesaid approval granted u/s 153D of the Act, wherein it has been stated that the draft assessment order as proposed by the ld AO had been amended by the ld JCIT and that the amended draft order has been accorded approval u/s 153D

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 150/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

JCIT. Further, it is a fact that the ld AO had sought for approval u/s 153D of the Act by forwarding the draft assessment order alone for the years under consideration vide letter dated 28.03.2022 upto AY 2019-20 and on 30.03.2022 for AY 2021-22. Evidences in this regard ... same date. On perusal of the aforesaid approval granted u/s 153D of the Act, wherein it has been stated that the draft assessment order as proposed by the ld AO had been amended by the ld JCIT and that the amended draft order has been accorded approval u/s 153D

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 149/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

JCIT. Further, it is a fact that the ld AO had sought for approval u/s 153D of the Act by forwarding the draft assessment order alone for the years under consideration vide letter dated 28.03.2022 upto AY 2019-20 and on 30.03.2022 for AY 2021-22. Evidences in this regard ... same date. On perusal of the aforesaid approval granted u/s 153D of the Act, wherein it has been stated that the draft assessment order as proposed by the ld AO had been amended by the ld JCIT and that the amended draft order has been accorded approval u/s 153D

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 148/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

JCIT. Further, it is a fact that the ld AO had sought for approval u/s 153D of the Act by forwarding the draft assessment order alone for the years under consideration vide letter dated 28.03.2022 upto AY 2019-20 and on 30.03.2022 for AY 2021-22. Evidences in this regard ... same date. On perusal of the aforesaid approval granted u/s 153D of the Act, wherein it has been stated that the draft assessment order as proposed by the ld AO had been amended by the ld JCIT and that the amended draft order has been accorded approval u/s 153D

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida vs. Ritu Kapur, Noida

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 996/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

Section 120Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 69A

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 ... 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." [Emphasis supplied] 12. It is observed that the Court in the case of Sapna Gupta (supra

Ritu Kapur, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 745/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

Section 120Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 69A

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 ... 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." [Emphasis supplied] 12. It is observed that the Court in the case of Sapna Gupta (supra

Ritu Kapur, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 744/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

Section 120Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 69A

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 ... 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." [Emphasis supplied] 12. It is observed that the Court in the case of Sapna Gupta (supra

Ritu Kapur, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 743/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

Section 120Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 69A

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 ... 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." [Emphasis supplied] 12. It is observed that the Court in the case of Sapna Gupta (supra

Rishnoor Kaur, Ireland vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 476/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Dhiman, Advocate (Virtual Mode)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 249(3)

wherever applicable, keeping in view the assessee’s status as a non-resident and any consequential requirement of issuing a draft assessment order, providing the assessee a further opportunity before the Dispute Resolution Panel, and completing the assessment thereafter in accordance with law. 7.4 The assessee is directed

Capricon Realty Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Circle Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5696/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Neha ParanjpeFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

working of disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D through Income Tax E-filing portal. ➤Later, the Assessing officer has during the assessment proceedings given draft assessment order dated 15/02/2021 proposing to make adjustment on account of Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D. Accordingly, the appellants have submitted its reply on 18/02/2021 through

Sap India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer - Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(1)(1), Bangalore

The appeal of the assessee is allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 1519/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K, Jm

Section 143Section 144BSection 144C

Consequently, an order under section 92CA (3) of the Income-tax Act was passed. 07. Based on this, the draft assessment order under section 144C (1) of the Act was issued on 29 August 2023, incorporating a total transfer pricing adjustment of ₹1,855,008,610 and assessing the total

Preity G Zinta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Ward 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4199/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Preity G Zinta Income Tax Officer, Int Tax, 403 Parishram, Ward 4(3)(1), Smt. Nergish Dutt Road, Mumbai Bandra West Vs. Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Aaapz2650B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri. Dharan Gandhi & Ms. Vinita Nara, Advocates Revenue : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.11.2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Dharan Gandhi and Ms. Vinita Nara, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 68

high value credits and debit transaction carried out by assessee, case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act. Ld. Assessing officer issued the draft assessment order dated 31.03.2022 proposing variation to the return income by making a proposed assessment of total income at Rs. 11,30,48,040/-. Against ... said draft assessment order, assessee filed objections before the ld. DRP who vide its order dated 31.12.2022 upheld the additions proposed by the ld. Assessing Officer. Subsequent to the directions, ld. Assessing Officer passed the final assessment order 3 Preity G Zinta AY 2016-17 in conformity with the directions

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4252/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.02.2022, which is not the case in hand. Your honour, even vide show cause notice (draft assessment order) dated 29.03.2022 ld. AO has stated that "onus of assessee to prove the genuineness of this transaction and the assessee could not provide any documentary evidence

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4251/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.02.2022, which is not the case in hand. Your honour, even vide show cause notice (draft assessment order) dated 29.03.2022 ld. AO has stated that "onus of assessee to prove the genuineness of this transaction and the assessee could not provide any documentary evidence