← All Phrases

“eligible assessee”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144CSection 144C662 judgments

The decision most relied on for eligible assessee is CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. (348 ITR 302), cited in 540 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on eligible assessee

CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.
348 ITR 302 · 2012 · Supreme Court
540
citing judgments

Goodwill, whether arising from an amalgamation or a slump sale, is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act. While the assessee must prove the existence and valuation of such goodwill, it is recognized as a depreciable asset.

Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT
262 ITR 278 · 2003 · Supreme Court
353
citing judgments

Income eligible for deduction under Section 80IA or 80IC must have a direct nexus with the eligible business activity of the industrial undertaking. Income merely incidental to the business, even if part of the assessee's overall business, is not considered "derived from" the eligible undertaking.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
391 ITR 274 · 2017 · Supreme Court
290
citing judgments

Deduction under Section 10A or 10AA of the Income-tax Act is computed on the profits of the eligible unit without first setting off losses from other units or non-eligible units. Conversely, losses incurred by an eligible unit are allowed to be set off against the assessee's other taxable business profits.

CIT v. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd.
322 ITR 323 · 2010 · High Court
229
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot deny a Section 80IA deduction by merely asserting that the assessee is not a "developer" without considering the relevant agreements and facts. Entitlement to Section 80IA deduction requires a thorough examination of the assessee's role as a developer.

CIT v. Claris Lifesciences Ltd.
326 ITR 251 · 2010 · High Court
196
citing judgments

If approval from the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) for an in-house R&D centre is granted during the previous year, the assessee is entitled to claim weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) for the entire expenditure incurred during that year.

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.

CIT v. Ramkrishna Deo
35 ITR 312 · 1959 · Supreme Court
84
citing judgments

The burden of proving that a particular income is exempt from taxation, or is not taxable, lies on the assessee. To claim an exemption or a deduction, the assessee must provide proper materials to establish eligibility.

CIT v. Kamal Wahal
351 ITR 4 · 2013 · High Court
71
citing judgments

An assessee is eligible for capital gains exemption under Sections 54 and 54F even when the new residential house is purchased in the name of their spouse, provided the investment comes from the assessee's own funds. This allows for a purposive construction of these provisions.

Judgments citing eligible assessee

Manoj Rajaram Sharma, Thane vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8313/MUM/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmanoj Rajaram Ito - 42(3)(4), Sharma, Mumbai Office No. 615, 6Th Vs. Kautilya Bhawan, C- Floor, Centura Square 41-43, Avenue 3, Near It Park, Sg Barve Videsh Bhavan, G Road, Thane, Block, Bkc, Mumbai Maharashtra-400 604. – 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Bytps1944K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suryadev Yadav, Shri Karan Hariya & Shri Prashant Gupta, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 4Section 44A

higher presumptive rate of 50% is itself misplaced. 16. It is apposite to examine the statutory scheme of presumptive taxation. Section 44AD applies to eligible assessees engaged in eligible business, and provides for taxation of income at 8% (or 6% in specified cases) of the total turnover or gross receipts

Home Credit International A.S., Czech Republic vs. Assistantdeputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation, Gurgaon Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3846/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 153Section 282

implementation of directions of learned DRP by the Assessing Officer. 13. Section 144C, which provides the mechanism for making assessment in case of an eligible assessee is a self contained code by itself. As per the provisions contained under section 144C of the Act, after framing of a draft assessment ... order, if eligible assessee chooses to avail the DRP route, then such assessee has to raise objections before the DRP within the period of 30 days of the receipt of draft assessment order. Sub-section (5) of section 144C provides that after receiving the objections, the DRP shall issue such

M/S. Hl Mando Anand India Pvt. Ltd., Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Corp. Circle-1(4), Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2088/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy.S & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2088/Chny/2025 िनधा#रण वष# /Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xi)Section 144B(1)(xix)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 250Section 35

NeAC. Subsequently, there is no requirement to serve any draft assessment order to the appellant before finalising the assessment when it is not an eligible assessee. Thus, it is clear that due procedure has been followed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre. The case law relied on by the appellant

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Tax)- 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Marriott International Inc, Mumbai

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 34/MUM/2026[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Krishna KumarFor Respondent: Shri Pratik Poddar, Shri Karan Jain
Section 144CSection 271(1)(c)

first required to pass draft assessment order u/s 144C (1) of the Act. On receipt of the draft assessment order, the eligible assessee within 30 days either accepts the variations or may file objections, against such variations before the DRP. If no objections are filed against the draft assessment order

Ramzan Mulla, Vijayapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Vijayapura

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

ITA 1103/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Jamuna, Advocate
Section 44ASection 69A

appellant had opted for presumptive taxation under Section 44AD, where maintaining detailed books of accounts is not mandatory.  Under Section 44AD, an eligible assessee declaring income on a presumptive basis (8% of Page 4 of 13 gross receipts) is not required to maintain books of accounts as per Section 44AA

Samiuddin Aslam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, all the 4 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1225/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1222 To 1225/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2019-20) Shri Samiudedin Aslam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4) Hyderabad Pan: Ckvpa7727F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per. Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The A. O Under Section 153C R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, All Dated 17/01/2025, For The Assessment. Years 2016-17 To 2019- 20 Respectively. The Assessee Has Raised Similar Grounds For All The Four Assessment Years. Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT (DR)
Section 115BSection 132Section 144C(5)Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee in light of provisions of section 153B of the Act, because once the assessee is an eligible assessee then as per the provisions of section 144C of the Act, the A.O will get one month time from the end of the month ... gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee is an ‘eligible assessee’ in terms of section 144C(15) of the Act and in case of an eligible assessee, the assessment should be framed under section 144C

Samiuddin Aslam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, all the 4 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1224/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1222 To 1225/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2019-20) Shri Samiudedin Aslam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4) Hyderabad Pan: Ckvpa7727F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per. Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The A. O Under Section 153C R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, All Dated 17/01/2025, For The Assessment. Years 2016-17 To 2019- 20 Respectively. The Assessee Has Raised Similar Grounds For All The Four Assessment Years. Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT (DR)
Section 115BSection 132Section 144C(5)Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee in light of provisions of section 153B of the Act, because once the assessee is an eligible assessee then as per the provisions of section 144C of the Act, the A.O will get one month time from the end of the month ... gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee is an ‘eligible assessee’ in terms of section 144C(15) of the Act and in case of an eligible assessee, the assessment should be framed under section 144C

Samiuddin Aslam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

ITA 1223/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.1222 To 1225/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2019-20) Shri Samiudedin Aslam Hyderabad Pan: Ckvpa7727F (Appellant) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4) Hyderabad (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 Per. Manjunatha, G. A.M. आदेश/Order These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The A. O Under Section 153C R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, All Dated 17/01/2025, For The Assessment. Years 2016-17 To 2019- 20 Respectively. The Assessee Has Raised Similar Grounds For All The Four Assessment Years. Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Common Consolidated Order.

For Respondent: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CA
Section 132Section 144C(13)Section 148Section 153BSection 153CSection 69

argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee in light of provisions of section 153B of the Act, because once the assessee is an eligible assessee then as per the provisions of section 144C of the Act, the A.O will get one month time from the end of the month ... gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee is an ‘eligible assessee' in terms of section 144C(15) of the Act and in case of an eligible assessee, the assessment should be framed under section 144C

Samiuddin Aslam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, all the 4 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1222/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1222 To 1225/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2019-20) Shri Samiudedin Aslam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4) Hyderabad Pan: Ckvpa7727F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per. Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The A. O Under Section 153C R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, All Dated 17/01/2025, For The Assessment. Years 2016-17 To 2019- 20 Respectively. The Assessee Has Raised Similar Grounds For All The Four Assessment Years. Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT (DR)
Section 115BSection 132Section 144C(5)Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee in light of provisions of section 153B of the Act, because once the assessee is an eligible assessee then as per the provisions of section 144C of the Act, the A.O will get one month time from the end of the month ... gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee is an ‘eligible assessee’ in terms of section 144C(15) of the Act and in case of an eligible assessee, the assessment should be framed under section 144C

Franklin Templeton International Services (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 6(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1495/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 133(6)Section 92D

case of the Appellant in lieu of the final assessment order given that the Appellant does not fall within the definition of "eligible assessee" as per Section 144C of the Act as the transfer pricing order is invalid and thus entire assessment is bad in law as provisions of section ... case of the Appellant in lieu of the final assessment order given that the Appellant does not fall within the definition of "eligible assessee" as per Section 144C of the Act as the transfer pricing order is invalid and thus entire assessment is bad in law as provisions of section

Franklin Templeton International Services (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2047/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 133(6)Section 92D

case of the Appellant in lieu of the final assessment order given that the Appellant does not fall within the definition of "eligible assessee" as per Section 144C of the Act as the transfer pricing order is invalid and thus entire assessment is bad in law as provisions of section ... order given that the 9 ITA No.2047/Mum/2014 & ITA No.1495/Mum/2015 Franklin Templeton International Services (India) P. Ltd. Appellant does not fall within the definition of "eligible assessee" as per Section 144C of the Act as the transfer pricing order is invalid and thus entire assessment is bad in law as provisions

Saikat Chinmay Bhattacharya, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT, International Taxation, Circle 1(1), Bangalore

ITA 582/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.582/Bang/2025

For Appellant: CA Darshit Naik, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Divya K.J, CIT D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 69

Source of income of his sister towards the above said income. 4. Return of income of his sister etc. As the assessee is an eligible assessee, the AO passed an draft assessment order on 09/03/2024 proposing to add Rs.76,70,000/- under the head income from other sources as unexplained

Gopal Muwel, Manawar vs. Income Tax Officer, Dhar

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

ITA 554/IND/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshigopal Muwel, Ito बनाम/ Morad, Manawar, Dhar Vs. Dhar (Pan: Caapm6256Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Lucky Singhal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 253Section 44ASection 57

work order, so disallowance the same is arbitrary and irrational. 2.Failure to Recognize Eligibility Under Section 44AD Presumptive Scheme- The appellant, being an eligible assessee with total receipts below the prescribed threshold and income received via banking channels, declared a profit rate exceeding 7%, which is higher than the required

Posco India Processing Center Private Limited, Gurgaon, Haryana vs. Ld. Assessing Officer (AO), Circle 3(1), Gurgaon, Haryana

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 6022/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.6022/धिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22) Posco India Processing Centre P. Ltd., Unit No.512, 5Th Floor, Tower-A, Park Centra Building, Sector-30, Gurgaon, Haryana 122001 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aafcp-0211-N बिाम Vs. Assessing Officer, Circle 3(1), Area Code-Nwr, Ao Type-C, Range Code-107, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Ao Number-1, Gurgaon, Haryana122016 आअसं.5454/धिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22) Intertek India P. Ltd., E-20 Block B-1, Mathura Road, Mohan Co-Operative Industrial Area, New Delhi 110044 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaaci-6890-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 10(1), Delhi Sa No.348/Del/2025 In Ita No. 5454/Del/2024(A.Y 2021-22) Intertek India P. Ltd., E-20 Block B-1, Mathura Road, Mohan Co-Operative Industrial Area, New Delhi 110044 ...... आवेदक/Applicant Pan: Aaaci-6890-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ...... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 10(1), Delhi

For Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

legislative design of section 144C indicates that it is a special self contained code in itself with regard to assessment of eligible assessee and prescribes entire procedure and time line for the framework of Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) to work: The provisions of this section cannot be interpreted ... draft finalization under section 144C to operate notwithstanding the general limitation in section 153. 17. A further significant facet is that it is the eligible assessee, which has option to activate or not to activate the DRP route. If objections before DRP are not filed, the statute permits expedited finalization

Groupe Seb India Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 6021/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.5984/धिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22) Tupperware India P. Ltd., 204-06, Tolstoy House, 15, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi 110001 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaact-3770-D बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 25(1), Cr Building, Delhi 110002 आअसं.6021/धिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22) Groupe Seb India P. Ltd. C-67, 3Rd Floor, Dda Sheds, Okhla Phase-1, Delhi 110020 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aagcm-6857-L बिाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Osd) ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Cr Building, Delhi 110002 आअसं.6047/धिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22) It (Tp)A No. 6047/Del/2024(A.Y 2021-22) Indo British Garments P. Ltd., C-16 Community Centre, Behind Janak Place, Delhi 110058 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaaci-7874-B बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Cr Building, Ip Estate, Delhi 110002

For Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

legislative design of section 144C indicates that it is a special self contained code in itself with regard to assessment of eligible assessee and prescribes entire procedure and time line for the framework of Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) to work: The provisions of this section cannot be interpreted ... draft finalization under section 144C to operate notwithstanding the general limitation in section 153. 17. A further significant facet is that it is the eligible assessee, which has option to activate or not to activate the DRP route. If objections before DRP are not filed, the statute permits

Tupperware India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

ITA 5984/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthitupperware India P. Ltd., आअसं.5984/दिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22)

For Respondent: Ms. Anju Goel, Chartered Accountant (Virtual)
Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण दिल्ली पीठ "आई", दिल्ली श्री विकास अवस्थी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री संजय अवस्थी, लेखाकार सदस्य के समक्ष

Federal-Mogul Ignition Products India Limited, Gurgaon vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(1), Range - 40, Delhi

ITA 5983/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthitaboola India P. Ltd., आअसं.5910/दिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22)

Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

legislative design of section 144C indicates that it is a special self contained code in itself with regard to assessment of eligible assessee and prescribes entire procedure and time line for the framework of Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) to work: The provisions of this section cannot be interpreted ... draft finalization under section 144C to operate notwithstanding the general limitation in section 153. 17. A further significant facet is that it is the eligible assessee, which has option to activate or not to activate the DRP route. If objections before DRP are not filed, the statute permits expedited finalization

Taboola India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi

ITA 5910/DEL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthitaboola India P. Ltd., आअसं.5910/दिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22)

Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

legislative design of section 144C indicates that it is a special self contained code in itself with regard to assessment of eligible assessee and prescribes entire procedure and time line for the framework of Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) to work: The provisions of this section cannot be interpreted ... draft finalization under section 144C to operate notwithstanding the general limitation in section 153. 17. A further significant facet is that it is the eligible assessee, which has option to activate or not to activate the DRP route. If objections before DRP are not filed, the statute permits expedited finalization

Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 19(1), Delhi

ITA 5909/DEL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.5907/दिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22)

Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण दिल्ली पीठ "आई", दिल्ली श्री विकास अवस्थी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री संजय अवस्थी, लेखाकार सदस्य के समक्ष

Renew Wind Energy (Mp Two) Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 19(1), Delhi

ITA 5908/DEL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.5907/दिल्ली/2024(नि.व. 2021-22)

Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण दिल्ली पीठ "आई", दिल्ली श्री विकास अवस्थी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री संजय अवस्थी, लेखाकार सदस्य के समक्ष