Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI • Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions • Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations • Issue-wise legal analysis • Practical arguments and supporting content • Professionally structured draft ready for further review.
Tax Assessment Order Quashed for Procedure Lapse; Jurisdictional Error Voids Order, Denying Right to Object Before DRP. The HC quashed the assessment order dated 15th June 2021, due to the Assessing Officer's failure to adhere to the mandatory procedure under Section ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tax Assessment Order Quashed for Procedure Lapse; Jurisdictional Error Voids Order, Denying Right to Object Before DRP.
The HC quashed the assessment order dated 15th June 2021, due to the Assessing Officer's failure to adhere to the mandatory procedure under Section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This was deemed a jurisdictional error, depriving the assessee of the right to object before the DRP, rendering the order void. No costs were awarded.
Issues: Failure to follow procedure under Section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: 1. The court noted that the Revenue acknowledged a failure by the Assessing Officer to follow the procedure under Section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized that this failure was not a mere procedural error but a breach of a mandatory provision. The failure to pass a draft Assessment Order and provide a copy to the assessee deprived the assessee of the right to object to any prejudicial variation. The court held that this constituted a jurisdictional error, not a procedural one, as the Assessing Officer wrongly assumed jurisdiction to pass the final order without following the prescribed procedure.
2. The court rejected the argument that the failure to follow the procedure under Section 144C(1) was merely a procedural or inadvertent error. It reiterated that this failure was a jurisdictional error, depriving the assessee of the right to object before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). The court emphasized that this failure was not a mere irregularity but an incurable illegality, as it vitiated the final assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer.
3. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the impugned assessment order dated 15th June, 2021, due to the failure to follow the mandatory procedure under Section 144C(1) of the Act. The court made no order as to costs, disposing of the petition.
This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the court's interpretation of the failure to follow the prescribed procedure under Section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing the distinction between procedural errors and jurisdictional errors, ultimately leading to the quashing of the assessment order.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.