“directions of the DRP”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144CSection 144C1,202 judgments

The decision most relied on for directions of the DRP is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Roca Bathroom Products (P) ltd. (445 ITR 537), cited in 269 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on directions of the DRP

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).

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

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.

Capital IQ Information Systems India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

32 Taxmann.com 21 · 2013 · ITAT

citing judgments

A change in depreciation policy impacts an entity's profitability, which is a key factor in assessing its suitability as a comparable company for transfer pricing analysis.

Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. v. ACIT (International Taxation)

457 ITR 161 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

The limitation period for passing an assessment order under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act prevails over the specific time restriction for passing a final order under Section 144C(13).

Software Paradigms Infotech (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT

89 Taxmann.com 339 · 2018 · ITAT

citing judgments

An assessment order passed without giving effect to the binding directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) under section 144C(10) within the stipulated time under section 144C(13) is null and void and must be set aside.

Bombay and Delhi High Courts in Vodafone Idea Limited v. Central Processing Centre

459 ITR 413 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

When determining the date of receipt of Directions from the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the purpose of limitation, the date of uploading the DRP's directions is considered the date of receipt, even if the AO claims to have received it later through email. This interpretation prevents parties from exploiting a later date to their advantage and adheres to a singular, unambiguous approach to reckoning limitation.

Trib.). 14. Bramhacorp Hotels & Resorts Ltd. v. DDIT

103 Taxmann.com 344 · 2019 · ITAT

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must comply with the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) when passing final assessment orders, and failure to do so may warrant setting aside the assessment with a direction for compliance.

Judgments citing directions of the DRP

Indeed India Operations Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee for the assessment year 2021-2022 is allowed

ITA 943/HYD/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.943 & 1359/Hyd/2024 Assessment Years 2020-2021 & 2021-2022 Indeed India Operations The Acit, Private Limited, Vs. Circle-2(1), Hyderabad – 500 081. Hyderabad. Telangana Pan Aadci5931J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Mahima Goud, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Mahima Goud, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

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

Assessing Officer to pass the final order within one month 7 ITA.Nos.943 and 1359/Hyd./2024 from the receipt of the Directions of the DRP and not enlarging the limitation which is provided u/sec.153 of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court has held that provisions u/sec.144C and 153C ... limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the 18 ITA.Nos.943 and 1359/Hyd./2024 directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the month of receipt of such directions. The section and the sub-section have

Calliduscloud (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle- 1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1395/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

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

Section 153 B is for a limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the month of receipt of such directions. The section and the sub-section have ... section 144C is concerned, it is for limited purpose to ensure that debers larger time available, an order hased on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the receipt of such 23 M/s. Callidus Cloud (India) Private Limited directions The section

Indeed India Operations Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle -(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1359/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.943 & 1359/Hyd/2024

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

Saxon Global India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-3(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1334/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Section 144C(5)Section 92C

Section 153 B is for a limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the month of receipt of such directions. The section and the sub-section have ... section 144C is concerned, it is for limited purpose to ensure that debers larger time available, an order hased on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the receipt of such directions The section and sub-section have to be read

Parexel International (Irl) Limited, Ireland vs. ADIT (Int Taxn)-2, Hyderabad

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

ITA 447/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.447/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Parexel International Vs. Additional Director Of (Irl) Limited, Ireland Income Tax Pan:Aaicp4417B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Kanchun Kaushal राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Parexel International (Irl) Limited, Ireland (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Adit (Int. Taxation)-2, Hyderabad (“Ld. Ao”) Dated 07.07.2023 For The A.Y 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Advocate Kanchun KaushalFor Respondent: : Smt. U Mini Chandran

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 92C

submitted that once the final assessment order is passed within 30 days from the receipt of directions of Ld. DRP, it is well within limitation. She also submitted that the issue is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and therefore the issue may be kept open until decided ... draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(1) of the Act was passed on 30.09.2022, and the directions of Ld. DRP under section 144C(5) of the Act were issued on 30.06.2023. The only issue before us is whether the limitation period for passing the final

Interwrap Corp Private Limited (Successor of Owens Corning Industries (India) Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT., Circle -5(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 496/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

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

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

ITAT in assessee’s own case for earlier years, the DRP deleted the adjustment towards royalty in entirety. 7. Pursuant to the directions of the DRP, the TPO, vide order dated 19.07.2022, gave effect to the DRP’s directions and recomputed the transfer pricing adjustment. Accordingly, the adjustment towards purchases ... Section 153 B is for a limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the month of receipt of such directions. The section and the sub-section have

Dr. Reddys, Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 491/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.490 & 491/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad. The Acit, Vs. Pin – 500 034. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – Telangana. 500 084. Pan Aaacd7999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Padamchand Khincha राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Padamchand KhinchaFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

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

u/sec.144C(13) is only a restriction on the Assessing Officer to pass the final order within one month from the receipt of the Directions of the DRP and not enlarging the limitation which is provided u/sec.153 of the Act. The Hon’ble Madras High Court has held that provisions u/sec.144C ... Section 153 B is for a limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the month of receipt of such directions. The section and the sub-section have

Dr. Reddys, Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 490/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: CA Padamchand KhinchaFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

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

Ntt Data Business Solutios Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 489/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.489/Hyd/2022 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Ntt Data Business The Dcit, Solutions Private Limited, Hyderabad. Circle-5(1), Vs. Pin -500081. Hyderabad. Pan Aadci1557Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Aliasgar Rampurawala राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Aliasgar RampurawalaFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144

u/sec.144C(13) is only a restriction on the Assessing Officer to pass the final order within one month from the receipt of the Directions of the DRP and not enlarging the limitation which is provided u/sec.153 of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court has held that provisions u/sec.144C ... Section 153 B is for a limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the month of receipt of such directions. The section and the sub-section have

R.A.K Ceramics India Private Limited, Samalkot vs. DCIT Circle -3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 465/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(5)

submitted that once the final assessment order is passed within 30 days from the receipt of directions of Ld. DRP, it is well within limitation. She also submitted that the issue is pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and therefore the issue may be kept open until decided ... draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(1) of the Act was passed on 25.09.2021, and the directions of Ld. DRP under section 144C(5) of the Act were issued on 06.06.2022. The only issue before us is whether the limitation period for passing the final

Myntra Inc., United States of America vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, grounds of appeal no

ITA 3770/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.3770/धिल्ली/2023(नि.व. 2021-22) Myntra Inc. 8201, 164Th Ave Ne, Suited 200, Redmond, Wa 98052, ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant United States Of America, 98052 Pan Aalcm-3409-K बिाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle International Tax 2(2)(1), Civic Centre, .....प्रनिवादी/Respondent Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 अपीलार्थी द्वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Sachit Jolly, Sr. Advocate With Ms. Rashi Khanna, Advocate प्रधिवािीद्वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Anjula Jain, Cit (Dr) & Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. Dr सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date Of Hearing : 12/09/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 16.10.2023, For Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. Shri Sachit Jolly, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Outset Submitted That On Instructions From The Assessee/Appellant He Is Not 2 Pressing Ground No. 2 Of Appeal, Assailing Validity Of The Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Directions Sans Din. In Light Of The Statement Made By Ld. Counsel For The Assessee At Bar, Ground Of Appeal No. 2 Is Dismissed As Not Pressed.

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Rashi Khanna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anjula Jain, CIT (DR) &

Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)

India P. Ltd., 457 ITR 84 (Del.). 5 7. Per contra, Ms. Anjula Jain, representing the department vehemently supported the Assessment Order and Directions of the DRP. The ld. DR reiterating findings of the Assessing Officer prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. 8. We have heard the submissions made

Andhra Paper Limited, Rajahmundry vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 349/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.349/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2020-21) Vs. Acit – Circle -1 Andhra Paper Limited 14-6-9, Admin Office Veerabhadrapuram Kateru Road Rajahmundry-533101 Sri Ramnagar S.O. (Rajahmundry) Andhra Pradesh Rajahmundry (Urban) East Godavari – 533105 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaact8849D]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

assessee, where the assessee failed to justify ALP of the international transactions and thereby confirming the order of the TPO. Following the directions of the DRP, the Ld. AO passed the final assessment order on 28.06.2024. 9. On being aggrieved by the final assessment order, the assessee is in appeal

Concentrix Catalyst Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle - 1(1), Hyderabad

ITA 963/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri D Prabhakar Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)

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

submitted that once the final assessment order is passed within 30 days from the receipt of directions of Ld. DRP, it is well within limitation. He also submitted that the issue is pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and therefore the issue may be kept open until decided ... draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(1) of the Act was passed on 29.09.2023, and the directions of Ld. DRP under section 144C(5) of the Act were issued on 25.06.2024. The only issue before us is whether the limitation period for passing the final

DCIT, Swargate Pune vs. Cummins India Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 1256/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 250Section 35

that at present, only the assessee has a right to appeal against the final assessment order framed by the AO after incorporating the directions of the DRP and the Department does not have any such right of appeal. It is also seen that in the case of the assessee

Cummins India Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 632/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Prakash L. Pathade, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 13Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 250Section 80J

Netcracker Technology Solutions (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle - 5(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 730/HYD/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

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

Section 153 B is for a limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the month of receipt of such directions. The section and the sub-section have ... section 144C is concerned, it is for limited purpose to ensure that debers larger time available, an order hased on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the receipt of such directions The section and sub-section have to be read

Brightcom Group Limited (Formerly Known As Lycos Internet Limited), Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1862/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Section 145Section 92BSection 92C

assessee, Hon'ble DRP has issued direction vide order dated 04.09.2017 making suitable adjustments to the TP additions. As per the directions of the DRP, the TPO suggested the additions to be made in the final assessment order to be passed by the A.O. The TPO upon receipt ... Section 153 B is for a limited purpose to ensure that dehors larger time is available, an order based on the directions of the DRP has to be passed within 30 days from the end of the month of receipt of such directions. The section and the sub-section have

Iqvia Ag, Switzerland vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Internaltional Taxation) - 2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 4549/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)Section 90(2)

ITAT, Mumbai, has ruled in favour of the Applicant and in order to keep the matter legally alive, and since the directions of the DRP are not appealable by the Department, the objections of the assessee are dismissed and AO was directed to give effect to the aforesaid directions ... subscription fees which is not taxable as „Royalty‟. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order passed by AO in pursuant to the direction of Ld. DRP. Resultantly, Ground No. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee are allowed. The other grounds no. 3 to 5 are consequential in nature, therefore needs

Iqvia Ag, Switzerland vs. The Income Tax Officer (International Taxation) - 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 3359/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)Section 90(2)

Devindra Singh, Jhajjar vs. DCIT, Int. Tax, Gurgaon

In the result, impugned assessment order is quashed being without jurisdiction and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4715/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं.4715/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2015-16) Devindra Singh, Viilage Naya Gaon, Bahadurgarh, Jhajjar, Haryana 124507 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan No: Akppg-1164-L बनाम Vs. Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ....."ितवादी/Respondent International Taxation, Gurgaon, Haryana

For Appellant: S/Shri Pranshu Singhal, Chartered Accountants &For Respondent: Shri M.S Nethrapal, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

instead of verifying the same made addition of Rs.52,40,000/- (i.e. after considering same transaction of Rs.26,20,000/- two times). After directions of the DRP, the AO examined the issue and concluded as under:- “Pursuant to the directions issued by the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP