“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

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

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

Vatika Seven Elements P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, all ITA Nos

ITA 9862/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5422/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 बनाम Express Freight Consortium, Assessment Unit,Income Tax C-4, District Centre, Saket, New Vs. Dept,Civic Centre,Pratyakshar Delhi. Bhawan, Pan No.Aaaae8440R Shayama Prasad Mukherjee Marg, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

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

Teva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Industries India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-25(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4197/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalteva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Vs Assessment Unit, Income Industries India Private Limited, Tax Department/Deputy 8Th Floor, C-Wing Time Square, Commissioner Of Income Andherikurla Road, Marol Naka, Tax, Circle 25(1), Opp Mittal Industrial Estate C. R. Building, Delhi- Andheri (E), Mumbai 400059, 110001 Maharashtra, India Pan: Bnspk7225H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv, Sh. Sohamdua, Adv& Sh. Abhiudaya Shankar Bajpai, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153r

that section 144C was introduced to create a structured and time-bound pre-finalisation review mechanism before a panel of Commissioners in cases involving "eligible assessees". The legislative design of section 144C indicates that it is a special statutory mechanism and cannot be interpreted in a manner that renders ... general limitation in section 153. 11 Teva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Industries India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 17. A further significant facet is that the eligible assessee activates the DRP route. If objections are not filed, the statute permits expedited finalisation. If objections are filed, the statutory mechanism consumes time by design

Kanhaiya Lal Panchal, Ratlam vs. Bpl-W-(91)(95), Ratlam

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 702/IND/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2024-25 Kanhaiya Lal Panchal, Bpl-W-(91)(95) 1, Jadwasa Kala, बनाम/ Ratlam Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aqrpp0055D Assessee By Shri Kaide Kangsawala, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026

Section 111ASection 112Section 112ASection 115BSection 143(1)Section 154Section 3(6)Section 81Section 87A

from the computed tax and is not a charging or computational section by itself. Therefore, the rebate under section 87A remains available to an eligible assessee unless it is specifically excluded by a provision of law, which is absent in the case of section 111A. The absence

Sicpa India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-23(2), New Delhi

ITA 8456/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.598 & 8456/दिल्ली/2019 (नि.व. 2014-15 & 2015-16)

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya KapoorFor 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

Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 598/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.598 & 8456/धिल्ली/2019 (नि.व. 2014-15 & 2015-16)

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR)

Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

Giesecke and Devrient India Pvt Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT (OSD), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1428/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Smt. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 119Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(8)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

have appreciated that if, the order dated 25.07.2021 passed by the TPO is non-est and void, then the Appellant is no longer an 'eligible assessee in terms of section 144C(15)(b) of the Act, thus assessment could not be framed in terms of section 144C

Bechtel Ltd, London vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 756/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 44DSection 9(1)(vii)

conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions make it clear that once the DRP issues certain directions while disposing of objections filed by an eligible assessee, the Assessing Officer is duty-bound to implement such directions in letter and spirit. 12. In the facts of the present appeal, undisputedly, the Assessing ... order of the DRP notwithstanding that the DRP had categorically held that the two Petitioners do not satisfy the conditions of an eligible assessee in terms of Section 144 (15) (b) (ii) of the Act. As already noticed under Section 144C (10) of the Act the AO had no option

Bechtel Limited, London vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax 1(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1816/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 44DSection 9(1)(vii)

Shakti Hormann Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 917/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.917/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Shakti Hormann Private Limited, Hyderabad. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. Pan: Aadcs4024Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “A.O.”) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”) Dated 25/07/2024 For The

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 92C

assessment shall be extended by 12 months. It is an undisputed fact that the present case is falling in the category of an "eligible assessee" where reference u/sec.92CA(1) was made by the Assessing Officer to the TPO and, therefore, the time limit for completing the assessment was extended ... time prescribed in section 153 (1) of the Act cannot apply where section 144C of the Act is applicable in the case of an eligible assessee. If Mr. Suresh Kumar was correct, then in our view, it would have been specifically so provided in section

Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 711/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.711/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2020-2021 Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Circle-3(1), Vs. Pin – 500 081. Hyderabad – 500 081. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aahcs9571J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca P Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)

sec.144C begins with a non-obstante clause and, therefore, sec.144C is a Code in itself so far as the assessments in case of an “eligible assessee” and, therefore, the non-obstante clause in sec.144C(13) excludes the provisions of sec.153 of the Act. Learned DR has submitted 11 ITA.No.711/Hyd ... sec.153 of the Act. The learned DR has further submitted that the Income Tax Act provides two different methods of assessment one for the “eligible assessee” as defined u/sec.144C(15)(b) of the Act and the “other method” is applicable for the assessees’ who falls under the normal category

Eaton Power Quality Private Limited, Puducherry vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Puducherry

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 231/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 92C

first instance, forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment (hereafter in this section referred to as the draft order) to the eligible assessee if he proposes to make, on or after the 1st day of October, 2009, any variation in the income or loss returned which is prejudicial ... interest of such assessee. (2) On receipt of the draft order, the eligible assessee shall, within thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order,— (a) File his acceptance of the variations to the Assessing Officer; or (b) File his objections, if any, to such variation with

Deputy Commissioner of Incometax, Chennai vs. Saint - Gobain India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the assessee succeeds

ITA 1672/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 92C

account of being barred by limitation under Section 153(1) read with Section 153(4) of the Act, since the Appellant is not an eligible Assessee under Section 144C(1) of the Act as the transfer pricing proceedings have become void ab--initio subsequent to the order of the Madras ... order dated 01.11.2019 is void-ab-initio and accordingly, the transfer pricing adjustment is non-est. Consequently, the Assessee cease to be an eligible assessee as defined under section 144C(15)(b) of the Act; and therefore, the machinery provisions of Section 144C of the Act wouldn’t get triggered

Saint-Gobain India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Ncc 8(1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee succeeds

ITA 1505/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 92C

Flamingo Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Sion Trombay Road Chembur vs. DCIT Circle-14(1)(2), Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Poojary,ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr.DR)

Section 143(3)Section 35

weighted deduction contemplated u/s 35(2AB) of the "Act". That as per the mandate of Sec. 35(2AB) of the "Act", an eligible assessee company which incurs any expenditure on in-house research and development facility (not being expenditure in the nature of cost of any land or building ... Prescribed authority" in „Form 3CL“ will not have any bearing as regards the allowability of the weighted deduction in the hands of the eligible assessee company, held as under:- "Thus there was no justification in harping upon the figure contained in Form 3CL as is done by the Assessing Officer

Damandeep Kaur, Mohali vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Chandigarh

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 902/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

follow the mandatory procedure laid down u/s 144C of the Act by not issuing a draft assessment order, despite the assessee being an “eligible assessee" within the meaning of section 144C(15)(b), being a non-resident during the respective years. Since this legal ground goes to the root ... assessee in written submissions has contended that once she is accepted as a non-resident, she automatically falls in the definition of “eligible assessee" u/s 144C(15)(b). It was argued that Section 144C uses two independent limbs – one for transfer-pricing cases and one for any non-resident assessee

Damandeep Kaur, Mohali vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Chandigarh

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 901/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

Damandeep Kaur, Mohali vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Chandigarh

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 900/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

follow the mandatory procedure laid down u/s 144C of the Act by not issuing a draft assessment order, despite the assessee being an “eligible assessee” within the meaning of section 144C(15)(b), being a non-resident during the respective years. Since this legal ground goes to the root ... assessee in written submissions has contended that once she is accepted as a non-resident, she automatically falls in the definition of “eligible assessee” u/s 144C(15)(b). It was argued that Section 144C uses two independent limbs – one for transfer-pricing cases and one for any non-resident assessee

Damandeep Kaur, Mohali vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Chandigarh

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 899/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 10(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

Tmeic Industrial Systems India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 898/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.898/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S. Tmeic Industrial Vs. Dy.Cit Systems India Private Limited Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadct5493J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.As, K. C. Devdas, Kranthi Palivela & Mrudulatha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Smt. U. Mini Chandran, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: C.As, K. C. Devdas, KranthiFor Respondent: Smt. U. Mini Chandran, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 254

that the section 144C of the Act begins with a non-obstante clause and therefore is a complete code in itself for assessment of “eligible assessees” as defined under section 144C(15)(b) of the Act. She submitted that due to the non-obstante clause in section 144C ... should override section 153 of the Act. She further submitted that the Act provides two different mechanisms of assessment (a) for eligible assessees under section 144C(15)(b) of the Act and (b) for normal assessees governed by section 153 of the Act. Under the special regime of section 144C

Gainsight Software Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-2(1), Hydersabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

ITA 796/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92D

time prescribed in section 153 (1) of the Act cannot apply where section 144C of the Act is applicable in the case of an eligible assessee. If Mr. Suresh Kumar was correct, then in our view, it would have been specifically so provided in section ... followed by the Assessing Officer only if he proposes to make any variation which is prejudicial to the interest of the eligible assessee. If the Assessing Officer did not wish to make any variation which is prejudicial to the interest of the eligible assessee, he need not go through