ICICI

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Faceless Assessment order passed without waiting the direction of DRP quashed by Calcutta HC

LinkedIn


Court :
Calcutta HC

Brief :
In Lexmark International (India) Private Limited v. Union of India & Ors. [WPA No.13778 of 2021 dated October 01, 2021], Lexmark International (India) Private Limited ("the Petitioner") filed petition challenging the impugned assessment order dated 30th July, 2021 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3), 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the IT Act") relating to Assessment Year 2017-2018 on the ground that the same is arbitrary, illegal and wrongful exercise of jurisdiction.

Citation :
WPA No.13778 of 2021 dated October 01, 2021

In Lexmark International (India) Private Limited v. Union of India & Ors. [WPA No.13778 of 2021 dated October 01, 2021], Lexmark International (India) Private Limited ("the Petitioner") filed petition challenging the impugned assessment order dated 30th July, 2021 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3), 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the IT Act") relating to Assessment Year 2017-2018 on the ground that the same is arbitrary, illegal and wrongful exercise of jurisdiction.

Factually, the Petitioner received a Draft Assessment Order under Section 144C of the IT Act against which he filed objection on 23rd June, 2021 before the Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") against the additions proposed in the said Draft Assessment, which was to be filed within 30 days from date.  Further, the Petitioner contended that in view of the Circular No. 12 of 2021 of the Central Board of Direct Tax ("CBDT") dated June 25, 2021, the last date of filing such objections under the said section was extended till 31st August, 2021.

And moreover without allowing the aforesaid period of expiry as per the Circular No. 12 of 2021 of dated June 25, 2021 and further, without waiting for the direction to be made by the DRP on such objection which is mandatory provision apart from the circular of the Board, which is binding upon the Assessing Officer being a subordinate authority under Section 19 of the IT Act, the Assessing Officer ("the Respondent") should not have passed the impugned assessment order.

Further, the Respondent was not in a position to defend and justify the action of the Respondent of passing the impugned assessment order in disregard to the aforesaid circular of the CBDT and also the action of the Respondent concerned in passing the impugned assessment order without getting any instruction from the DRP within the time stipulated under the statute.

The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court considering these facts set aside the impugned assessment order and all subsequent actions or steps on the basis of such assessment. And directed that the Respondent shall proceed with the relevant assessment proceeding in question after getting the direction from the DRP in accordance with law.

 

Bimal Jain
on 30 October 2021
Published in Income Tax
Views : 127
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags