2022:BHC-OS:3933-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2437/2021 Renaissance Services BV ] C/o Marriott Hotels India ] Private Limited, 303 A, 304, ] Fulcrum, B Wing, Hiranandani ] Business Park, Sahar road, ] Andheri(E), Mumbai-400 099. ]

PAN: AAECR4995E ]…. Petitioner.

Vs.

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax- ] International Tax Circle-4(1)(1) ] Mumbai having an address at 17th ] floor,Air India Building, Nariman ] Point, Mumbai-400 021. ] 2. Union of India ] Through the Secretary, ] Ministry of Finance, ] Government of India, ] North Block, ]

New Delhi -110 001 ] ….. Respondents.

---------

Mr. J. D. Mistri, Senior Advocate a/w Advocate Paras Savla and Advocate Pratik Poddar for petitioner.

Mr. Suresh Kumar, Advocate for Respondents.

---------

CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &

N.R.BORKAR, JJ.

DATE : 21st APRIL 2022.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) :

1. Petitioner is a Company and tax resident of the Netherland. Petitioner is impugning in this petition an order dated 27.09.2021 passed under Section 143(3) r/w Section 144-C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as the ‘said Act’) and consequent penalty notice on the ground that assessment order was passed beyond the period of limitation provided u/s 144-C of the said Act.

2. Petitioner filed its original return of income for the relevant Assessment Year 2018-2019 on 29.10.2018 declaring total income of 19,96,290/-. Subsequently, return was revised to claim correct tax deducted at source, total income being the same. Return of income was picked up for scrutiny and notice dated 22.09.20219 u/s 143(2) of the said Act was issued to petitioner. Subsequent notices were also issued and petitioner responded to those notices. Respondent no.1 passed draft assessment order dated 19.4.2021 u/s 143(3) r/w Section 144-C of the said Act proposing to make addition amounting to Rs.38,97,58,539/-

(hereinafter to be referred as ‘draft assessment order’).

3. This draft assessment order came to be passed as per the provisions of Sub-section 1 of Section 144-C of the said Act with variations proposed since the petitioner was eligible assessee as per provisions of Section 144-

C(15)(b) of the said Act.

4. As per provisions of Sub-section 2 of Section 144-C of the said Act eligible assessee has a right to file objections to draft assessment order or convey his acceptance against proposed variations in draft assessment order within 30 days from the date of receipt of draft assessment order. If assessee conveys his acceptance to the draft assessment order or does not file objections with Dispute Resolution Panel (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘DRP’) within time limit prescribed in Section 144-C(2) of the said Act, then, as per Sub-section 4 of Section 144-C of the said Act, the Assessing Officer has to pass final assessment order on the basis of the draft order within 1 month from the end of the month in which acceptance is received or period of filing of objections under Sub-section 2 of Section 144-C of the said Act expires.

5. By letter dated 15.5.2021, forwarded to respondent no.1 by email on 17.5.2021, petitioner informed respondent no.1 that it would not be opting for DRP route and instead would pursue normal appellate channel, i.e., file an appeal with Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against final assessment order. Petitioner, of course, also noted its objections to the additions proposed. In short, petitioner informed respondent no.1 to go ahead and pass final assessment order as per proposed draft without prejudice to petitioner’s right to raise all objections before Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals). Receipt of this communication is admitted by respondent no.1.

6. Therefore, it is petitioner’s case that as per provisions of sub-section 4 of Section 144-C of said Act, respondent no.1 ought to have passed final assessment order u/s 143(3) r/w Section 144-C(3) of the said Act, within one month, from the end of the month in which a