ORDER

Akil Kureshi, J. - Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 29th May, 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order dated 29th May, 2015 is in respect of Assessment Year 2007-08.

2. The Revenue urges the following question of law for our consideration:

" Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal is correct in entertaining the objection that the assessment order is without jurisdiction null and void and unenforceable?"

3. Respondent-Assessee is engaged in the business of Design, Development and export of computer software and providing information technology enabled services.

4. For the subject Assessment Year, an assessment was completed on 17th October, 2011 under Section 144C(13) read with Section 143(3) of the Act, by making various additions. On challenge, the Tribunal by its order dated 25th January, 2012 set aside the above Assessment Order dated 17th October, 2011 and restored the assessment to the Assessing Officer. This was only for the reason that the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) had not dealt with the objections of the Respondent.

5. On the above remand, the Assessing Officer referred the International Transactions to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). On receipt of the Order dated 27th January, 2014 of the TPO, the Assessing Officer passed an Assessment Order on 12th March, 2014 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144(C)(13) of the Act. This on the basis of the observations made by the DRP in original Assessment Proceedings, which has already been set aside.

6. Thereafter, on 16th April, 2014, the Assessing Officer issued a corrigendum to Assessment Order dated 12th March, 2014. This to the effect that the order dated 12th March, 2014 should be treated as Draft Assessment Order and not as a final order disposing of the Assessment for subject Assessment Year.

7. The Respondent, thereafter, challenged the Draft Assessment Order, as a result of the corrigendum, before the DRP. Thereafter, the final Assessment Order dated 9th January, 2015 was also passed in terms of DRP directions. It is the above order dated 9th January, 2015 which was the subject of challenge before the Tribunal.

8. In appeal before the Tribunal, the Respondent urged that the order dated 9th January, 2015 of the Assessing Officer is without jurisdiction. In as much the assessment was completed earlier on 12th March, 2014 by passing a final order without following the mandate of Section 144(C)(i) of the Act or directions of the Tribunal. Further, the above order dated 12th March, 2014 is sought to be converted into a Draft Assessment Order by corrigendum dated 16th April, 2014 i.e. beyond the period to pass an order under Section 153(2A) of the Act. If the corrigendum is of no effect, then all subsequent proceedings are without jurisdiction.

9. The Tribunal by the impugned order, noted the fact that even, according to the Assessing Officer, the time to complete the Assessment, consequent to the order dated 25th January, 2012 of the Tribunal expired on 31st March, 2012. This in terms of Section 153(2A) of the Act. In this case, the Tribunal held that the final order was passed on 12th March, 2012. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer after having become functus Officio, on 16th April, 2014 issued a corrigendum to the order dated 12th March, 2012, seeking to convert the final order of Assessment into a draft order of Assessment. This, the Tribunal found is not permissible as the corrigendum dated 16th April, 2014 was issued after the time to pass the Assessment Order, had expired. In fact, the Tribunal notes and follows the decision of the Madras High Court in similar facts in the case of Vijay Television (P) Ltd., vs. DRP 369 ITR 113 (Mad.). In fact, in the above case, the Court held that a corrigendum issued beyond the period of limitation is a defective, thus ineffective. The impugned order also held that the Asse