Back
RAJIV SHAKDHER, GIRISH KATHPALIA
Fujitsu India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2. 1 – Respondent
JUDGMENT
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
1. On 03.06.2021, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we had broadly etched out the contours of the controversy which arises between the parties in the matter. For the sake of convenience, the relevant part of the said order is set forth hereafter:
"2. Via this writ petition, challenge has been laid to the final assessment order dated 24.05.2021, concerning the assessment year ('AY') 2017-18, passed under Section 144C(3) read with Section 143(3) and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').
2.1. Besides this, there are other prayers also made in the writ petition, including a prayer for issuing a writ of mandamus, certiorari or any other appropriate writ to quash/set aside the Standing Order No. 1439(E) dated 31.03.2021, issued by the Central Government in exercise of its powers conferred under Section 250(6C) of the Act.
3. Mr. Deepak Chopra, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that the impugned final assessment order is flawed, broadly, for two reasons:
(i) Firstly, the statutory procedure prescribed under Section 144B of the Act was not adhered to, by the
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to statutory procedures and timelines in the assessment process under the Income Tax Act.
The court emphasized the importance of complying with time limits and the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to pass assessments in conformity with the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel.
Violation of mandatory procedure under Section 144C of the Income Tax Act and a circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes led to the setting aside of the Assessment Order and restoration o....
A taxpayer must file objections to proposed tax assessments with both the Dispute Resolution Panel and Assessing Officer for effective challenge under the Income Tax Act.
An assessment order passed without compliance with procedural requirements of the Income Tax Act is invalid and must be set aside.
The court ruled that an Assessing Officer must wait for the Dispute Resolution Panel's directions before passing a final assessment order, even if objections are not communicated timely, emphasizing ....
The court established that a final assessment order cannot be issued without awaiting directions from the Dispute Resolution Panel when objections have been timely filed.
The assessing officer must await the Dispute Resolution Panel's decision before proceeding with the final assessment, as outlined in Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, ensuring adherence to procedur....
Draft assessment order under section 144C with demand notice and penalty initiation is invalid as final order; mandatory procedure violation jurisdictional and incurable, quashing assessment.
The central legal point established is that the Assessing Officer must adhere to the mandatory requirement of passing and forwarding a draft assessment order to the Assessee before passing a final as....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
