“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

Lord India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result we allow the additional ground raised by the assessee and quash the assessment order

ITA 424/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhaillord India Private Vs. Assistant Commissioner Limited (F Ormer Ly Know N A S L Ord Of Income-Tax, Circle- India C Hem Ica L Pr Od Uct S Pv T. Lt D. ) 10(2)(1), Room No. 509, A/401-404, 215 – Atrium Aayakar Bhavan, Chakala, Andheri – Kurla M.K. Road, Road Andheri (East) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400093 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacu0785H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : M.P. Lohia Respondent By : Dr. Samual Pitta Date Of Hearing 29.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Drp-1, Mumbai Dated 26.02.2015 For A.Y. 2011- 12. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. Transfer Pricing - Availing Of Intra-Group Services 1.1 On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Acit/ Drp Erred In Determining The Arm'S Length Price In Relation To The International Transaction Relating To The Availing Of Group Benefit Services/ Technical Service Management Services (Hereinafter Referred To As "Intra-Group Services") Of Rs.1,14,87,092 To Be Rs. 22,97,418/-, Thus Making An Adjustment Of Rs.91,89,674/- & Thereby Disregarding The Fact That The Appellant Had Received The Services For The Purposes Of Its Business. In Doing So, The Learned Acit/ Drp Grossly Erred By Not Appreciating The Commercial Wisdom/ Expediency Of The Appellant

For Appellant: M.P. LohiaFor Respondent: Dr. Samual Pitta

Section 40

Invesco Uk Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Taxation 2(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2211/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Anshuman Pattnaik, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153B

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

Fiberhome India Private Limited, Delhi vs. Circle -2(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the SA of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 812/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Sh. K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhaskar Goswami, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153B

Airbnb Payments India Private Ltd., Haryana vs. Tpo 1(3)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 409/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhaskar Goswami, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153B

Amadoroco Limited, Nicosai Cyprus vs. ACIT, Int. Tax. 1(1)(1), New Delhi

ITA 784/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.784/Del/2020, A.Y. 2016-17

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

invoke proceedings u/s.144C of the Act and pass a draft assessment order therein. The first pre-condition is that the assessee should be eligible assessee as defined u/s.144C(15) of the Act. The second condition is that the Assessing Officer should propose to make any variation in income or loss ... assessee, which is prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. In this case, it is an undisputed fact that the assessee is eligible assessee for the purpose of above said section, which is the first condition. However, it is also evident from above provision that jurisdictional precondition must exist before

Travelport Lp, Georgia Usa vs. DCIT, International Taxation Circle-3(1)(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 6503/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar – CIT-DR

Section 144Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234C

under Section i44C(i) read with Sections 147 and 143(3) °f the Act is invalid as the Appellant is not an ‘eligible assessee’ under Section i44C(is)(b) of the Act. 2.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. DRP erred ... confirming the actions of the Ld. AO and holding that the Appellant is a foreign company and thereby is an ‘eligible assessee’ as per Section i44C(i5)(b) of the Act without appreciating that the Appellant is a limited partnership based in United States of America (“USA”). 3. That

Bharat Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Harugeri, Belgavi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(2), Belgavi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 14/PAN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji24 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Chougule, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikant

Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 40Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Karnataka State Souharda Federal Co-operative Ltd. [2022] 134 taxmann.com 170 (Karnataka) has treated a souharda cooperative credit society as an 3 ITA.No.14/PAN/2019 eligible assessee u/s.2(19) of the Act. Faced with this situation, I accept the assessee’s instant sole substantive ground in very terms. 4. Learned

D.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), Kolkata vs. Electrosteel Casting Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 485/KOL/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Dec 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Years: 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Income-Tax, Central G.K. Tower Vs. Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, Camac Street Kolkata -700017 (Pan: Aaace4975B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43(1)

similar services. The Safe Harbour rules prescribing 2% as the Guarantee Commission is not relevant as those rules are relevant only to an eligible Assessee who opts to be governed by those rules. Accordingly, following the decisions of the Tribunal referred to above, we direct the AO/TPO to adopt

M/S Piramal Enterprises Limiited, Mumbsi vs. Dy CIT(Appeal)-Range-8(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 727/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Piramal Enterprises Ltd., Dy. Cit, Mumbai-8(1)(2), Or Piramal Tower, Agastya National Facelss Assessment Vs. Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Centre, Delhi, Kamani Junction, Kurla Room No. 624, 6Th Floor, (West), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400070. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacn 4538 P Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ronak Doshi : Revenue By Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Cit-Dr & Mr. Samuel Pitta, Dr : Date Of Hearing 17/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/12/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Ronak Doshi

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)

pass a revised draft 144B(1), which mandates the AO to pass a revised draft assessment order to an eligible assessment order to an eligible assessee w/s 144C, is assessee w/s 144C, is invalid and has no legs to stand. invalid and has no legs to stand. M/s Piramal Enterprises

M/S. Mercator Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO by the asssessee are dismissed and the asseessee appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7278/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 7278/Mum/2017 (A.Y: 2010-11) & Co No. 21/Mum/2019 (2010-11) (Arising Out Of Ita No. 29/Mum/2018) Mercator Ltd Vs. Dcit 3Rd Floor, Mittal Tower- Range 5(2) B Wing, Nariman Point Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Mumbai- 400021. Road, Mumbai-400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacm5007A Appellant .. Respondent Dy. Cit Vs. Mercator Lines Ltd Range 5(2)(2), Rno.571 3Rd Floor, Mittal Tower- Aayakar Bhavan, Mk B Wing, Nariman Point Road, Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai - 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacm5007A Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Mr.Nikhil Tiwari.Ar Revenue By : Mr.Krishnakumarmishra.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: 29/Mum/2018 & Co No. 21/Mum/2019 M/S. Mercator Ltd, Mumbai. The Cross Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Cit(A))-57, Mumbai Passed U/S 250 Of The Act & The Assessee Has Filed The Cross Objection(Co) In The Revenue Appeal.

For Appellant: Mr.Nikhil Tiwari.ARFor Respondent: Mr.KrishnaKumarMishra.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

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 of section 144C ... Emerson Electric (Company) India Pvt Ltd (ITA No 933/M/2021) dated 18 May 2022 Further, as per provisions of section 144C of the Act, 'eligible assessee' refers to any person in whose case the variation referred to in section 144C(1) of the Act arises as a consequence of the order

Siemens Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1954/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C(3)

mandated' before the Assessing Officer passes a final order under Section 143(3) of the Act in case of an 'eligible assessee', and the relevant extract of the judgment reads as under :— "5. Therefore, in view of Section 144C(15) of the Act which defines eligible assessee to whom Section ... mandated before the Assessing Officer passes a final order under Section 143(3) of the Act in case of eligible assessee. An draft assessment order passed under Section 144C(1) of the Act bestows certain rights upon an eligible assessee such as to approach the DRP with its objections

Hotel Deepak, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 3, Kalyan

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

ITA 1887/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

gains of business on presumptive basis. 44AD. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent of the total turnover or gross receipts of the assessee ... account of such business or, as the case may be, a sum higher than the aforesaid sum claimed to have been earned by the eligible assessee, shall be deemed to be the profits and gains of such business chargeable to tax under the head "Profits and gains of business

Shell India Markets P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu-2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

ITA 2340/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman आअसं.1492/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) M/S. Mondelez India Foods Private Limited, Mondelez House, Unit No.2001, 20Th Floor, Tower -3 (Wing C), India Bulls Finance Centre, Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. Pan: Aaacc-0460-H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range – 5 (1), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं.1576/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Large Taxpayer Unit)-2,Mumbai, World Trade Centre -1, Cuffe Parade, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai – 400 005 बनाम Vs. M/S. Shell India Markets Private Ltd. 1018, Maker Chambers –V, 10Th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 Pan: Aaics-1404-P ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate with Shri Hiten ChandeFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha ,CIT-DR

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

facts. 7.5 The ld.Counsel for the assessee further submits that the provisions of section 144C of the Act are applicable only to the “eligible assessee” as defined in sub-section (15), clause(b) to section 144C of the Act. The ld.Counsel for the assessee again draws support from the decision ... Saint Gobain India (P) Ltd.,(supra) to buttress 7 ITA NO.1576/MUM/2015(A.Y.2009-10) his arguments, that the assessee in the present case is not “eligible assessee”as there is no valid order under section 92CA(3) of the Act in the case of assessee. Therefore, the assessment framed on the basis

DCIT, (Ltu)-2, Mumbai vs. Shell India Markets Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

ITA 1576/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate with Shri Hiten ChandeFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha ,CIT-DR

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

Mondelez India Foods P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

ITA 1492/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate with Shri Hiten ChandeFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha ,CIT-DR

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

M/S Ut Worldwide (India) Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 11 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 7597/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Us Is Engaged In The Business Of Air & Ocean & Freight Forwarding, Warehousing & Clearing Agent, The Assessee Has Entered Into A Number Of International Transactions With Its Associated Enterprises Abroad & That, As A Consequence Of The Order Passed Under Section

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 153

Assessing Officer, subjected to variations prejudicial to the interests of the assessee. There is no dispute that the assessee was an „eligible assessee‟ in terms of the provisions of Section 144C, and that the Assessing Officer was under an obligation to “forward a draft order of proposed assessment (hereafter ... this section referred to as „draft assessment order) to the eligible assessee”, i.e. the assessee before us. There is also no dispute that in terms of the provisions of Section 153 read with Section 144C, such a draft order was required to be forwarded to the assessee on or before

Imperial Jewels, Mumbai vs. NFAC/DCIT, Cir -24(1), Mumbai

ITA 398/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Samruddhi Dhananjay Hande, D.R

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(15)(b)Section 144C(3)Section 153Section 92C

order dated 26.03.2021 under Section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. DRP vide order dated 27.12.2021 held that the assessee is not an "Eligible Assessee" and DRP cannot assume jurisdiction. The Learned AO without taking cognizance of the Provisions of Section 153 of the Act and the DRP Order ... Learned AO erred in passing the draft order under Section 144C of the Act without appreciating the fact that the appellant is not an "Eligible Assessee" within the meaning of provisions of Section 144C(15)(b) of the Act. The draft order under Section 144C of the Act and Final

Ravikumar Tirupati Parthasarathy, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 676/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144C

admitting total income of Rs.2,95,600. The case was Page 2 of 10 selected for scrutiny. The assessee being an eligible assessee as per the provisions of section 144C of the Act, the AO completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C by issuing a draft assessment order ... notice that as per the Explanatory Memorandum to Finance Bill, 2020, though the amendment to include non-residents as eligible assessee with effect from 1.4.2020, it is mentioned that, “if the AO proposes to make any variation after this date, in case of eligible assessee, which is prejudicial

DCIT Intl Tax Cir-4(3) (2) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Win on Shipping, Mumbai

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 2079/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla/For Respondent: Shri Somendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 90(4)

obstante clause, cannot be read as a limitation to the treaty superiority under Section 90(2), we are of the considered view that an eligible assessee cannot be declined the treaty protection under section 90(2) on the ground that the said assessee has not been able to furnish

Keller Ground Engineering India Private Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai

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

ITA 114/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadhri, CAFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 92C

along with this draft assessment order. The ld.AR also took us to para 2 of the draft assessment order, wherein the assessee is an eligible assessee for assessment u/s.92CA of the Act and he referred to the following para 2:- “2. As per the provisions of Chapter ... 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