← 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

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1168/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

passed on dated 27/04/2022 after prior approval of Addl CIT/Joint CIT, Central Range Jaipur. Before the approval, Addl CIT/Joint CIT gone thoroughly the draft assessment order, seized records and other material relevant to Assessment Order. In assessment order the cash loan is clearly mentioned. Therefore, the cause of action

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 1167/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

passed on dated 27/04/2022 after prior approval of Addl CIT/Joint CIT, Central Range Jaipur. Before the approval, Addl CIT/Joint CIT gone thoroughly the draft assessment order, seized records and other material relevant to Assessment Order. In assessment order the cash loan is 33 M/s Gokul Kripa Colonisers & Developers

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1166/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

passed on dated 27/04/2022 after prior approval of Addl CIT/Joint CIT, Central Range Jaipur. Before the approval, Addl CIT/Joint CIT gone thoroughly the draft assessment order, seized records and other material relevant to Assessment Order. In assessment order the cash loan is clearly mentioned. Therefore, the cause of action

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1165/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

passed on dated 27/04/2022 after prior approval of Addl CIT/Joint CIT, Central Range Jaipur. Before the approval, Addl CIT/Joint CIT gone thoroughly the draft assessment order, seized records and other material relevant to Assessment Order. In assessment order the cash loan is clearly mentioned. Therefore, the cause of action

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1164/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

passed on dated 27/04/2022 after prior approval of Addl CIT/Joint CIT, Central Range Jaipur. Before the approval, Addl CIT/Joint CIT gone thoroughly the draft assessment order, seized records and other material relevant to Assessment Order. In assessment order the cash loan is clearly mentioned. Therefore, the cause of action

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1162/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

passed on dated 27/04/2022 after prior approval of Addl CIT/Joint CIT, Central Range Jaipur. Before the approval, Addl CIT/Joint CIT gone thoroughly the draft assessment order, seized records and other material relevant to Assessment Order. In assessment order the cash loan is clearly mentioned. Therefore, the cause of action

Sunil Kumar Gattani, Jaipur vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 2, Jaipur

In the result ground no. 7

ITA 1142/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 115BSection 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

evident that such approval has also been granted in mechanical manner for all the 7 years, without even discussing contents of draft assessment order. Your honours would appreciate that it is now settled position of law that separate separate approval needs to be granted for each assessment year, by superior ... order of approval under section 153D for relevant assessment year was granted by Addl. Commissioner for 43cases on a single day without perusing draft assessment orders at all and without an independent application of mind, impugned assessment order was rightly declared to be illegal by Tribunal - Held, yes [Paras

Sri Srinivasa Educational & Charitable Trust, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Bengaluru

ITA 940/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT &
Section 12ASection 132Section 132(3)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 25Section 250Section 8

independent evaluation of the voluminous assessment records and seized materials, accorded approval in a perfunctory and routine manner. The AO submitted the draft assessment orders for six assessment years, from A.Y. 2015-16 to A.Y. 2020-21, to the Addl. CIT on 23.11.2023, and the Addl. CIT granted approval ... Hence, it is incorrect to assume that the ld. Addl. CIT becomes aware of the facts only at the time of receiving the draft assessment order. It is, in fact, a continuous process of supervision and monitoring, not a one-day exercise as alleged by the assessee. 18.2 The learned

Sri Srinivasa Educational & Charitable Trust, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore

ITA 939/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT &
Section 12ASection 132Section 132(3)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 25Section 250Section 8

independent evaluation of the voluminous assessment records and seized materials, accorded approval in a perfunctory and routine manner. The AO submitted the draft assessment orders for six assessment years, from A.Y. 2015-16 to A.Y. 2020-21, to the Addl. CIT on 23.11.2023, and the Addl. CIT granted approval ... Hence, it is incorrect to assume that the ld. Addl. CIT becomes aware of the facts only at the time of receiving the draft assessment order. It is, in fact, a continuous process of supervision and monitoring, not a one-day exercise as alleged by the assessee. 18.2 The learned

Bharti Mukesh Chandarana, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Int. Tax) Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

ITA 4972/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing) Bharti Mukesh Chandarana, Income Tax Officer Ward No. 64, Balasinor Society, S.V. Road, Vs 2(1)(1) Mumbai, Room No. 618, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Kandivali (West), Mumbai-400067, Maharashtra Bhawan, C-41 To C-43, G Block, [Pan No. Aacpc 4520F] Int Tax Ward, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153Section 153(2)Section 253

issued without seeking valid Bharti Mukesh Chandarana approval under section 151 of the Act, hence, the notice under section 148 and the subsequent draft assessment order dated 31 March 2025 passed under section 144C(1) of the Act is without jurisdiction and the same may quashed. (2) The notice under ... authority and based on the satisfaction note attached to the draft approval. Hence, notice issued under section 148 of the Act and the draft assessment order passed under section 144C(1) of the Act is bad in law and without jurisdiction. The same may be quashed and set aside

ACIT-6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited(Formerly Knowns As Century Textiles and Industries Limited), Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4359/MUM/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri yogesh Thar & Shri VinayakFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-
Section 250Section 32(1)(i)

under: (viii) the assessment unit shall, after taking into account all the relevant material available on the record, make in writing, a draft assessment order either accepting the returned income of the assessee or modifying the returned income of the assesse, as the case may be, and send a copy ... such order to the National e-assessment Centre, Aditya Birla Real Estate Ltd. (x) the National e-assessment Centre shall examine the draft assessment order in accordance with the risk management strategy specified by the Board, including by way of an automated examination tool, whereupon it may decide

Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited (Formerly Known As Century Textiles and Industries Limited), Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2979/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri yogesh Thar & Shri VinayakFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-
Section 250Section 32(1)(i)

under: (viii) the assessment unit shall, after taking into account all the relevant material available on the record, make in writing, a draft assessment order either accepting the returned income of the assessee or modifying the returned income of the assesse, as the case may be, and send a copy ... such order to the National e-assessment Centre, Aditya Birla Real Estate Ltd. (x) the National e-assessment Centre shall examine the draft assessment order in accordance with the risk management strategy specified by the Board, including by way of an automated examination tool, whereupon it may decide

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 509/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

impugned assessment order u/s 153C of the Act, dated 18.03.2024 was passed by the Ld. AO without passing any draft assessment order which is an essential requirement enumerated u/s 144C of the Act., The Section 144C requires that final assessment order against a Non-resident Assessee must be preceded ... draft assessment order if the Assessing Officer proposes to make any variation in income that is prejudicial or adverse to the interest of the eligible Assessee. Hence, the impugned order is without jurisdiction and void ab initio. 8. It is evident from the assessment note sheet available on Page

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 508/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

impugned assessment order u/s 153C of the Act, dated 18.03.2024 was passed by the Ld. AO without passing any draft assessment order which is an essential requirement enumerated u/s 144C of the Act., The Section 144C requires that final assessment order against a Non-resident Assessee must be preceded ... draft assessment order if the Assessing Officer proposes to make any variation in income that is prejudicial or adverse to the interest of the eligible Assessee. Hence, the impugned order is without jurisdiction and void ab initio. 8. It is evident from the assessment note sheet available on Page

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 507/JPR/2025[A.Y. 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

impugned assessment order u/s 153C of the Act, dated 18.03.2024 was passed by the Ld. AO without passing any draft assessment order which is an essential requirement enumerated u/s 144C of the Act., The Section 144C requires that final assessment order against a Non-resident Assessee must be preceded ... draft assessment order if the Assessing Officer proposes to make any variation in income that is prejudicial or adverse to the interest of the eligible Assessee. Hence, the impugned order is without jurisdiction and void ab initio. 8. It is evident from the assessment note sheet available on Page

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 506/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

impugned assessment order u/s 153C of the Act, dated 18.03.2024 was passed by the Ld. AO without passing any draft assessment order which is an essential requirement enumerated u/s 144C of the Act., The Section 144C requires that final assessment order against a Non-resident Assessee must be preceded ... draft assessment order if the Assessing Officer proposes to make any variation in income that is prejudicial or adverse to the interest of the eligible Assessee. Hence, the impugned order is without jurisdiction and void ab initio. 8. It is evident from the assessment note sheet available on Page

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 505/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

impugned assessment order u/s 153C of the Act, dated 18.03.2024 was passed by the Ld. AO without passing any draft assessment order which is an essential requirement enumerated u/s 144C of the Act., The Section 144C requires that final assessment order against a Non-resident Assessee must be preceded ... draft assessment order if the Assessing Officer proposes to make any variation in income that is prejudicial or adverse to the interest of the eligible Assessee. Hence, the impugned order is without jurisdiction and void ab initio. 8. It is evident from the assessment note sheet available on Page

Shital Nilesh Parakh, Ahilyanagar vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ahilyanagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 182/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.182/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Shital Nilesh Parakh, Vs. Ito, Ward-2, 1, Main Road, Vambori, Ahilyanagar. Tal. Rahuri, Dist. Ahilyanagar- 413704. Pan : Aptpp5302G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prasad Bhandari Revenue By : Shri Shashank Ojha Date Of Hearing : 19.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.11.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Prevailing Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A)-Nfac Erred In Not Accepting The Agriculture Income Of Rs. 89,50,214 Without Appreciating The Submission Made By The Assessee. Hence, The Impugned Order

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 69C

assessee to furnish cash book but no reply or documents were furnished by the assessee despite due service of show cause notice and draft assessment order for proposed addition. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 19.09.2022 completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act by determining

Precision Camshafts Limited, Pune vs. DCIT Circle 1, Solapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2744/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2744/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Precision Camshafts Limited, V Assessment Unit, E-102/103, Akkalkot Road S Income Tax Department Midc, Solapur – 413006. (National Faceless Maharashtra. Assessment Center), Jurisdiction : Pne C(1), Range 63, Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax („Dcit‟), Circle-1, Solapur. Pan: Aabcp1086B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil S Pathak - Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 21/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Read With Section 144B Of The Act, 1961 Dated 24.10.2024 For A.Y.2021-22 Emanating From Dispute Resolution Panel‟S Order Passed Under Section 144C(5) Of

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92B

A.Y.2021-22 emanating from Dispute Resolution Panel‟s order passed under section 144C(5) of ITA No.2744/PUN/2024 [A] the Act, dated 06.09.2024 and Draft Assessment Order passed under section 144C(1) of the Act, dated 20.12.2023. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “The following grounds are taken without ... guarantee. Therefore, TPO proposed a markup of 0.5% to 1.9%. Thus, TPO proposed interest rate of 1.9%. 5. The Assessing Officer passed the Draft Assessment Order on 20.12.2023 considering the Transfer Pricing Officer‟s order dated 21.10.2023. Aggrieved by the Draft Assessment Order, Assessee filed its objections before Dispute Resolution

Avann Buildsys Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle), Karnal, Haryana

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5657/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sh. Dhruv Goel, CA (Thru VC)For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 263Section 56(2)(viib)

asking details with respect to share premium received. The assessee has not responded to the notices. A show cause notice u/s. 144 containing draft assessment order was sent to the assessee on 21.3.2022. In response to the show cause notice, the assessee made his submissions on 23.3.2022. On careful perusal