← All Phrases

“final assessment order”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144CSection 144C4,041 judgments

The decision most relied on for final assessment order is Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO (106 ITR 1), cited in 486 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on final assessment order

Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO
106 ITR 1 · 1977 · Supreme Court
486
citing judgments

The principle of finality dictates that stale issues should not be reactivated, and lapse of time brings repose to judicial and quasi-judicial controversies. A Commissioner cannot substitute their judgment for the Assessing Officer's unless the assessment order is legally erroneous, not merely less elaborate, thus limiting revisionary powers under Section 263.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Roca Bathroom Products (P) ltd.
445 ITR 537 · 2022 · High Court
269
citing judgments

The time limit for the Assessing Officer to pass a final assessment order under Section 144C(13) following directions from the Dispute Resolution Panel is determined by the specific provisions of Section 153, particularly Section 153(2A).

CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd.
376 ITR 456 · 2015 · Supreme Court
221
citing judgments

The requirement to file a certificate or form (e.g., Form 10CCB, 10-IC) along with the return of income for claiming a deduction (e.g., under sections 80-IB, 115BAA) is directory regarding its timing. Such a deduction is allowable if the requisite form is filed before the final order of assessment, as procedural requirements should not override substantive benefits.

Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain
259 ITR 449 · 2003 · Supreme Court
147
citing judgments

Section 144C(4) uses a non-obstante clause to expedite the final assessment order, requiring the Assessing Officer to pass it immediately upon acceptance or lack of objection to the TPO's order, irrespective of broader time limits under Section 153.

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.

Travancore Diagnostics P. Ltd. v. ACIT
390 ITR 167 · 2017 · High Court
50
citing judgments

Failure to issue notice under section 143(2) before finalizing a reassessment order under section 147 is a fatal jurisdictional error, and this defect cannot be cured by invoking section 292BB of the Income-tax Act. Consequently, such a reassessment order is not sustainable in law.

Addl. CIT v. Mukur Corporation
111 ITR 312 · 1978 · High Court
49
citing judgments

When setting aside an assessment under Section 263(1) and directing a fresh assessment, the Commissioner need not record final conclusions or express final opinions on controversial points. It also interprets 'prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue' as meaning the assessment order is not in accordance with law, leading to the non-realization of lawful revenue.

Judgments citing final assessment order

Andante Foods LLP, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru

Appeal are allowed, and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1723/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Respondent: Shri Harsha M., CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

whether the assessee is a debt free company or not is of no consequence. Accordingly, the order of the TPO was upheld. Final assessment order was passed determining the total income of assessee incorporating the above adjustment. 12. The assessee is aggrieved and is in appeal before us raising

Factive Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation )-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4706/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Girish Agrawal & Factive Limited Asst. Cit(It)-2(3)(1) C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Llp 609, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, 252, Veer Savarkar Marg, C-41, C-43, G Block, Vs. Shivaji Park, Dadar, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 028 Bandra (E), Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Aaccf 5745 J (Appellant) : (Respondent) : Shri Dhanesh Bafna A/W Appellant By Shri Yogesh Malpani & Ms. Kinjal Patel Respondent By : Shri Krishna Kumar (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: Captioned Appeals By The Assessee Are Against The Final Assessment Orders Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short), In Pursuance To The Directions Of Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Ld. Drp' For Short) & Pertains To The Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2021-22 & 2022-23. 2. Since The Substantive Issue On Merits, Arising In The Appeals Are More Or Less Common In Both The Appeals, We Propose To Take Up Ita No. 4706/Mum/2023, Pertaining To A.Y. 2021-22, As The Lead Appeal. (A.Ys. 2021-22 & 2022-23) Factive Limited Vs. Asst. Cit(It) 3. Ground Nos. 1, 2 & 3 Are Basically On Legal Issues, Challenging The Validity Of The Final Assessment Order. At The Outset, Ld. Counsel Appearing For The Assessee Submitted That He Would Prefer To Address The Issues On Merits And, If Warranted, May Press The Legal Grounds.

For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vi)

Date of Pronouncement : 15.09.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Vice President: Captioned appeals by the assessee are against the final assessment orders passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short), in pursuance to the directions of learned Dispute ... Factive Limited vs. Asst. CIT(IT) 3. Ground nos. 1, 2 & 3 are basically on legal issues, challenging the validity of the final assessment order. At the outset, ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that he would prefer to address the issues on merits and, if warranted, may press

Sanjay Mehta, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle (Intl Tax), Jaipur

ITA 201/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 144C(5)Section 153CSection 69B

considers it imperative to make a mention in this regard. 8. In compliance with the directions of the DRP, the AO passed the final assessment orders under Section 153C read with Section 144C(13) on 23.01.2025and 27.01.2025 for the assessee and Urvashi Mehta. Aggrieved by such order, the assessee ... wife. It was further directed to make the entire addition in the assessment year under consideration, i.e., Assessment Year 2018-19. XI. Final Assessment Order a. Pursuant to ld. DRP's directions, ld. AO passed the Final Assessment Order under Section 153C r.w.s.144C(13) on 23.01.2025. b. In this final

D. E. Shaw India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1154/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1154/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. D.E. Shaw India Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Ltd., Hyderabad. Tax, Pan:Aaacd7214J Circle 8(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Adv. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By M/S. D E Shaw India Pvt. Ltd. (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. Ao”) U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Dated 27.06.2024 For The A.Y. 2020-21. 2. At The Outset, It Is Seen That There Is A Delay Of 66 Days In Filing Of The Present Appeal, For Which The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons For Delay In Filing Of The Appeal. As Per Record, The Appeal Was Required To Be Filed On Or Before

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, SR-DR
Section 143(3)

assessment on 27.06.2024 by making total addition of Rs.1,69,05,538/- on account of interest on trade receivables. 9. Aggrieved with the final assessment order of Ld. AO, the assessee is in appeal before us. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that the grounds of appeal

Philips International B.V, Kolkata vs. ACIT(I.T), Cir-2(1), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 555/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm M/S Philips International B.V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income C/O Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp, Tax (International Taxation), Bengal Intelligent Park, Building Circle 2(1), Kolkata Omega, 13Th & 14Th Floor, Room No. 210, 2 Nd Floor, Vs. Block-Ep & Gp, Sector-V Salt Aaykar Bhavan, Poorva, 110, Lake Electronic Complex, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Kolkata-700091 West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcp4065J Assessee By : Shri Ketan K. Ved, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K. Ved, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 282(2)

allowed by following the said decision of the co- ordinate Bench. 04. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the final assessment order as referred above though has not been signed by AO but the fact remains that all the procedures and formalities were completed before issue ... accounting, auditing, financial, fiscal, human resources management, insurance, tax and legal services, which were offered to tax in India. In this case, the final assessment order was passed by the ld. AO u/s Philips International B.V.; A.Y. 2020-21 143(3) read with section 144C passed on 27.01.2023, which

Bmw India Pvt Ltd, Haryana vs. ACIT Circle1(1), Gurgaon

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2024/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Bmw India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner 2Nd Floor, Oberoi Centre Of Income Tax, Circle (1), Building No. 11, Dlf Cyber Hsiidc Building, Vanijya City Dlf Phase, Gurgaon, Nikunj Udhyog Vihar, Haryuana, 122001 Phase-5, Gurgaon, Pan: Aabcb7140C Haryana Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Himanshu S. Sinha-Adv, Ms. Kanika Jain, Adv& Sh. Prashant Meharchandani, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 06/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Challenging The Final Assessment Order Passed By Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)-Gurgaon, Dated 28/06/2022 U/S254R.W. Section 143(3)/144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' For Short).

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 254Section 254rSection 92C

Date of Hearing 06/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement 12/09/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present Appeal is filed by the challenging the Final Assessment Order passed by Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)-Gurgaon, dated 28/06/2022 u/s254r.w. Section 143(3)/144C of the Income ... directions, beyond the statutory time limit prescribed under the Act.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that initially a Final assessment Order came to be passed on 19/02/2016u/s 143(3) r.w. Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short), pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12,wherein

Dheeraj Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6159/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

Assessing Officer in terms of Section 144A of the Act. She stated that even the Additional CIT/JCIT is involved in the preparation of final assessment order by way of instructing the Assessing Officer issuing final show cause notice. She referred to Paragraph 3.2 of the Manual, which reads as under

Wipro Ge Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal o f the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4521/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Wipro Ge Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit (Earlier Know As Ge Healthd Care Circle12(1) Pvt. Ltd.) 4, Kadugodi, Industrial New Delhi Area, Bangalore,Pan: Aaacw1685J Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv, Sh. Viyustirawat, Adv& Sh. Devansh Jain, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 05/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153

12/09/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The captioned appeal is filed by the assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 challenging the Final Assessment Order passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -12(1)-New Delhi dated 26/05/2014 Order u/s 143(3) r.w. Section 144C(5)/254 ... Grounds mentioned above. 4. The ld. Senior Counsel Sh. Sachit Jolly canvassing on the Ground No. 4 submitted that the impugned Final Assessment Order dated 26/05/2014 passed u/s 143(3) read with Section 144(5)/254 of the Act is barred by limitation as the final assessment order has been

Sri Sainath Associates, Lucknow vs. Dy.CIT-6, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 649/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 253(3)

Chengalvaraya Naicker Trust v. Income-tax Officer Failure to issue Show Cause Notice (SCN)/Draft Assessment Order (DAO) under section 144B, before Passing final assessment order, is only a procedural irregularity, hence, where no SCN/DAQ had been issued prior to passing of final assessment order, impugned assessment, were

Raghupati Mercantiles Private Limited, West Bengal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 49(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 320/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 14Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

draft assessment order was passed in name of SPIL increasing assessee's income-DRP issued its order in name of MSIL- However, final assessment order was passed in name of SPIL-ITAT set aside final assessment order on ground that it was void ab initio, having been passed in name

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai vs. Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result all the four appeals of the Assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2959/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2754, 2755, 2756 & 2757/Cnny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & Sa 22/Chny/2025 [In Ita 2757/Chny/2024] धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Schneider Electric Systems Acit India Private Limited, Vs. Corporate Circle 3(1) Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Chennai. Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2958 & 2959/Chny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 Acit Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Corporate Circle 3(1) Vs. Chennai. Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) धनिाजररती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Ms. Tanya, Advocate (Virtual) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 250

made certain adjustments / disallowances to the assessee’s income. Against the draft assessment order of the AO, the assessee requested for issuance of final assessment order to enable it to file an appeal before ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the AO passed final assessment order for the above AY’s. The ld.CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai vs. Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result all the four appeals of the Assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2958/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2754, 2755, 2756 & 2757/Cnny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & Sa 22/Chny/2025 [In Ita 2757/Chny/2024] धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Schneider Electric Systems Acit India Private Limited, Vs. Corporate Circle 3(1) Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Chennai. Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2958 & 2959/Chny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 Acit Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Corporate Circle 3(1) Vs. Chennai. Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) धनिाजररती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Ms. Tanya, Advocate (Virtual) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 250

made certain adjustments / disallowances to the assessee’s income. Against the draft assessment order of the AO, the assessee requested for issuance of final assessment order to enable it to file an appeal before ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the AO passed final assessment order for the above AY’s. The ld.CIT

Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Chennai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre - Jao - ACIT, Corporate Circle, 3(1), Chennai

In the result all the four appeals of the Assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2757/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2754, 2755, 2756 & 2757/Cnny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & Sa 22/Chny/2025 [In Ita 2757/Chny/2024] धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Schneider Electric Systems Acit India Private Limited, Vs. Corporate Circle 3(1) Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Chennai. Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2958 & 2959/Chny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 Acit Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Corporate Circle 3(1) Vs. Chennai. Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) धनिाजररती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Ms. Tanya, Advocate (Virtual) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 250

made certain adjustments / disallowances to the assessee’s income. Against the draft assessment order of the AO, the assessee requested for issuance of final assessment order to enable it to file an appeal before ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the AO passed final assessment order for the above AY’s. The ld.CIT

Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Chennai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre - Jao - ACIT, Corporate Circle, 3(1), Chennai

In the result all the four appeals of the Assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2756/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2754, 2755, 2756 & 2757/Cnny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & Sa 22/Chny/2025 [In Ita 2757/Chny/2024] धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Schneider Electric Systems Acit India Private Limited, Vs. Corporate Circle 3(1) Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Chennai. Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2958 & 2959/Chny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 Acit Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Corporate Circle 3(1) Vs. Chennai. Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) धनिाजररती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Ms. Tanya, Advocate (Virtual) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 250

made certain adjustments / disallowances to the assessee’s income. Against the draft assessment order of the AO, the assessee requested for issuance of final assessment order to enable it to file an appeal before ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the AO passed final assessment order for the above AY’s. The ld.CIT

Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Corporate Circle, 3(1), Chennai

In the result all the four appeals of the Assessee and both the appeals

ITA 2755/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2754, 2755, 2756 & 2757/Cnny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & Sa 22/Chny/2025 [In Ita 2757/Chny/2024] निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Acit Corporate Circle 3(1) Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2958 & 2959/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 Acit Corporate Circle 3(1) Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Ms. Tanya, Advocate (Virtual) : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit. :-2-:

For Respondent: Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate &
Section 143(1)Section 250

made certain adjustments / disallowances to the assessee's income. Against the draft assessment order of the AO, the assessee requested for issuance of final assessment order to enable it to file an appeal before Id.CIT(A). Accordingly, the AO passed final assessment order for the above AY's. The Id.CIT

Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Corporate Circle, 3(1), Chennai

In the result all the four appeals of the Assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2754/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2754, 2755, 2756 & 2757/Cnny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & Sa 22/Chny/2025 [In Ita 2757/Chny/2024] धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Schneider Electric Systems Acit India Private Limited, Vs. Corporate Circle 3(1) Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Chennai. Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2958 & 2959/Chny/2024 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 Acit Schneider Electric Systems India Private Limited, Corporate Circle 3(1) Vs. Chennai. Sp Plot, 16-20 & 20A, Tamarai Tech Park, Inner Ring Road, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aabcs-8027-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) धनिाजररती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Ms. Tanya, Advocate (Virtual) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 250

made certain adjustments / disallowances to the assessee’s income. Against the draft assessment order of the AO, the assessee requested for issuance of final assessment order to enable it to file an appeal before ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the AO passed final assessment order for the above AY’s. The ld.CIT

Apollo Tyres Ltd., Cochin vs. DCIT Corporate Cir 1(1), Kochi

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

ITA 679/COCH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2020-21 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Acit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 35Section 92C

Pronouncement: 10.09.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the final assessment order dated 20.06.2024passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") for Assessment Year ... above additions. The DRP partly allowed objections. 6. On receipt of the directions from the DRP, the AO had passed the final assessment order dated 20.06.2024 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144Bof the Act at a total loss of Rs. 279,84,04,204/- after making

Apollo Tyres Ltd, Cochin vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cochin

In the result, this ground of appeal stands allowed

ITA 1000/COCH/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2021-22 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Acit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

Pronouncement: 10.09.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the final assessment order dated 24.10.2024passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") for Assessment Year ... objections vide order dated 04.09.2024. 3 Apollo Tyres Ltd. 6. On receipt of the directions from the DRP, the AO had passed the final assessment order dated 24.10.2024passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144Bof the Act at a total loss of Rs. 11,53,70,330/- after

Neovantage Bio-Technology Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle 5(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 924/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

filed by M/s. Neovantage Innovation Park Private Limited and M/s. Neovantage Bio-Technology Private Limited (“the assessees”), feeling aggrieved by the separate final assessment orders passed by the respective Learned Assessing Officer ITA Nos.923 & 924/Hyd/2024 2 (“Ld. AO”) u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income ... directions under section 144C(5) of the Act on 26.06.2024. In accordance with the directions of Ld. DRP, the Ld. AO passed the final assessment order on 19.07.2024 under section 143(3) r.w.s. ITA Nos.923 & 924/Hyd/2024 17 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, making TP additions of Rs.13

Neovantage Innovation Park Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 16(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 923/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

filed by M/s. Neovantage Innovation Park Private Limited and M/s. Neovantage Bio-Technology Private Limited (“the assessees”), feeling aggrieved by the separate final assessment orders passed by the respective Learned Assessing Officer ITA Nos.923 & 924/Hyd/2024 2 (“Ld. AO”) u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income ... directions under section 144C(5) of the Act on 26.06.2024. In accordance with the directions of Ld. DRP, the Ld. AO passed the final assessment order on 19.07.2024 under section 143(3) r.w.s. ITA Nos.923 & 924/Hyd/2024 17 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, making TP additions of Rs.13