EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

section 1448 of IT Act, the case was duly transferred to the jurisdiction AO, who has no previous idea about the assessment proceedings in the case. However it is pointed out, that, even during the DRP stage and even after providing opportunity by AO, the assessee could not submit any evidence with respect to bank statement of assessee and also

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA (P) LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

1) of section 245M, the period of limitation available under this section to the Assessing Officer for making an order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be, shall, after the exclusion of the period under sub-section (5) of the said section, be not less than one year; and where such period of limitation is less than

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MICROSOFT INDIA ( R & D) PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

1) of section 245M, the period of limitation available under this section to the Assessing Officer for making an order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be, shall, after the exclusion of the period under sub-section (5) of the said section, be not less than one year; and where such period of limitation is less than

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

1) of section 245M, the period of limitation available under this section to the Assessing Officer for making an order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be, shall, after the exclusion of the period under sub-section (5) of the said section, be not less than one year; and where such period of limitation is less than

XANDER ADVISORS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

144C. (1) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, in the 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

XANDER ADVISORS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

144C. (1) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, in the 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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION- 2, NEW DELHI vs. HYUNDAI ROTEM COMPANY

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner as provided in sub-section (12) of Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:29.10.2025 18:22:45 Signature Not Verified ITA No.304/2025 Page 27 of 46 Section 144-BA. (14-B) The Central Government may make a scheme, by notification in the Official

TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL & CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-25(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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.

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

XL INDIA BUSINESS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

AL MAHA FOODS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (JAO - DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalal Maha Foods International Vs National Faceless Private Limited, 1122, Dlf Assessment Centre (Jao- Tower A, Jasola, New Friends Dcit Circle 1(1), C. R. Colony, S.O. Zakir Nagar, Building, I. P. Estate, Delhi Delhi-110025 New Delhi Pan: Aabca8743L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv& Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

SUPERBRANDS LTD (UK),GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.332/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Superbrands Ltd. (Uk) Dcit C/O Bdo India Llp 1501-1508, Vs. Circle 3(1)(2), Palm Spring Plaza, Sector-54, International Taxation, Golf Course Road, Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana. Pan No. Aaics6497G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

LINTEC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,SOUTH DELHI, DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 13(1), OFFICE OF DCIT, CR BUILDING, DELHI,

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwallintec India Private Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of 14Th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Income Tax, Circle 13(1), Nehru Place, South Delhi, Delhi Office Of The Dcit, C. R. 110019, Building, Delhi Pan: Aaccl23772F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Supriya Mehta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

HONDA INDIA POWER PRODUCTS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all two appeals are allowed

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2139 & 2140/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 बनाम Honda India Power Products Ltd. Acit, 409, Dlf Tower B, Vs. Circle-10(1), C.R. Building, Jasola Commercial Complex, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaach8464L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

HONDA INDIA POWER PRODUCTS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all two appeals are allowed

Bench: Shrivikas Awasthy & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2139 & 2140/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 बनाम Honda India Power Products Ltd. Acit, 409, Dlf Tower B, Vs. Circle-10(1), C.R. Building, Jasola Commercial Complex, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaach8464L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

JOHNSON MATTHEY INDIA PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-13(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Ltd., 5Th Floor, C/O Regus Circle-13(1) Business Center, Gurgaon C.R. Building, Delhi Road, South West Delhi- 110037. Pan-Aaacj2919A Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Sumit Mangal, Adv. Ms. Radhika Sharma, Adv. Ms. Soumya Pandey, Adv. Revenue By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : 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.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Dated 23.10.2024 Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. During The Course Of Hearing The Bench Has Asked The Assessee To File Specific Ground Of Appeal No.2 As Against General Ground Of Appeal No. 2 Taken. In Compliance, Assessee Vide Application Dt. 12.03.2025 Filed Under Rule 11 Of The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 Raised Additional Ground Of Appeal Under. The Additional Ground Of Appeal Taken Reads As Under: Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit

reassessment cannot be read into Section Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that

POSCO INDIA PROCESSING CENTER PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON, HARYANA vs. LD. ASSESSING OFFICER (AO), CIRCLE 3(1), GURGAON, HARYANA, GURGAON, HARYANA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

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

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

M/S. LUFTHANSA TECHNIK SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआअसं.1727/धिल्ली/2014(नि.व. 2009-10) Lufthansa Technik Services India P. Ltd., Ndg Centre, B-4, Gulmohar Park, New Delhi 110049 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaaco-7766-N बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 4(1), R. No.316-A, C R Building, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent New Delhi आअसं.1965/धिल्ली/2015(नि.व. 2010-11) Lufthansa Technik Services India P. Ltd., Ndg Centre, B-4, Gulmohar Park, New Delhi 110049 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaaco-7766-N बिाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 15(4), ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent New Delhi आअसं.1706/धिल्ली/2016(नि.व. 2011-12) आअसं.506/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2012-13) Lufthansa Technik Services India P. Ltd., Ndg Centre, B-4, Gulmohar Park, New Delhi 110049 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aaaco-7766-N बिाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 15(2), R.No. 316-A, Cr Building, New Delhi

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section

M/S LUFTHANSA TECHNIK SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more particularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the non-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings are not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the learned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees that the outer time limit under Section