IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘H’ NEW DELHI)

BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 537/DEL/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18)

ITA No. 2374/DEL/2022 (A.Y. 2018-18)

ITA No. 2374/DEL/2022 (A.Y. 2018-18)

ITA No. 2374/DEL/2022 (A.Y. 2018-18)

ITA No. 2374/DEL/2022 (A.Y. 2018-18)

ITA No. 2374/DEL/2022 (A.Y. 2018-18)

ITA No. 2374/DEL/2022 (A.Y. 2018-18)

ITA No. 2374/DEL/2022 (A.Y. 2018-18) ITA No. 4412/DEL/2024 (A.Y. 2020-21)

ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The captioned appeals are filed by the Assessees challenging the respective Final Assessment Orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w. Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act in short) dated 31/01/2022 pertaining to A.Y 2017-18, dated 30/07/2022 for A.Y

2018-19 and 30/07/2024 pertaining to A.Y 2020-21 respectively.

2. The Assessees have raised Additional Ground No. 6 in A.Y 2017- 18, Additional Ground No 23 in A.Y 2018-19 and Ground No. 13 in A.Y 2020-21 contending that the impugned Final Assessment orders dated 24/08/2022 are time barred by limitation and are bad in law, as the same have been passed beyond the time frame prescribed under section 153(1) read with section 153(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short). The Ld. Assessee's Representative relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Roca Bathroom Products (P.) Ltd. [2022] 445 537 (Madras) and also plethora of orders passed by the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench sought for allowing the Additional Ground No. 6 in A.Y 2017-18, Additional Ground No 23 in A.Y 2018-19 and Ground No. 13 in A.Y 2020-21 contending that the impugned Final Assessment orders dated 24/08/2022of the Assessee.

3. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the issue of limitation arising from the interplay between Section 144C and Section 153 of the Act is presently unsettled and pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. in Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos. 20569-20572/2023 therefore, deciding the very same issue by this Tribunal at this stage would be premature, thus submitted that the Tribunal cannot decide the issue of limitation in terms of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Roca Bathroom Products (P) Ltd. (supra). Accordingly, the Ld. Department's Representative sought for deferral of adjudication of the present Appeal and also the issue of limitation. The Ld. Department's Representative has also filed detail written submission.

4. The identical submissions of the parties have been considered by us in the case of Teva Pharmaceutical & chemical Industries India Private Limited Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department/DCIT in ITA No. 4197/Del/2024 vide order dated 19/01/2026. The Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal while and rejected the preliminary objection raised by the Revenue and also the request of the Department for deferring the hearing of the Appeal and decided the Appeal by dealing with the issue of limitation. By following the ratio laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Teva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Industries India Private Limited (supra), we reject the preliminary objection raised by the Revenue and the request of the Department for deferring the hearing.

5. The Ld. Assessee's Representative filed date chart and contended that the outer statutory time limit for completion of assessment u/s 153(1) r.w.s 153(4) of the Act for Assessment Year 2017-18 expired on 30/09/20221, for A.Y 2018-19 expired on 30/09/201 and for A.Y

2020-21 expired on 30/09/2021. However, the impugned Final assessment orders came to be passed u/s 143(3) r.w. Section 144C(13) of the Act on 31/01/2021 for A.Y 2017-18, on 30/07/2022 for A.Y 2018-19 and for A.Y 2020-21 the Final Assessment order passed on 30/07/2024, which are beyond the statutory limitation p