Court denies exemption from fees, orders stay on assessment, citing breach of natural justice.

The court denied the petitioner's request for exemption from court fees and filing documents. The petitioner sought a stay on the draft assessment order, alleging a breach of natural justice. The court agreed with the petitioner's contention that the Assessing Officer should have allowed an opportunity to explain before adding a significant amount to the taxable income under Section 92CA(4). Despite suggestions to seek redressal before the Dispute Resolution Panel, the court found merit in the petitioner's arguments and issued notice for further examination. A stay was ordered on the draft assessment order, and the case was listed for further hearing.

---

---

Issues:
1. Exemption from court fees and filing documents
2. Stay on draft assessment order dated 24.04.2021
3. Breach of natural justice in passing draft assessment order
4. Application of Section 92CA(4) of the Income Tax Act
5. Availability of alternate remedy before the Dispute Resolution Panel
6. Addition to taxable income on account of international transactions
7. Examination of the petitioner's grievance regarding compensation received on demerger

Exemption from Court Fees and Filing Documents:
The petitioner sought exemption from depositing court fees and filing documents, which was denied. The court directed the petitioner to comply with the requirements within three days of the court resuming normal work.

Stay on Draft Assessment Order:
The petitioner filed an application seeking a stay on the draft assessment order dated 24.04.2021, alleging a breach of natural justice. The order was passed by the Assessing Officer under Sections 144C(1), 143(3), and 144B of the Income Tax Act, adding a substantial amount to the petitioner's taxable income.

Breach of Natural Justice in Passing Draft Assessment Order:
The petitioner contended that the draft assessment order was passed in violation of natural justice principles. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) had issued two orders, one of which left the matter open for examination by the Assessing Officer. The petitioner argued that the AO could not have applied Section 92CA(4) of the Act without providing an opportunity to explain its position.

Application of Section 92CA(4) of the Income Tax Act:
The court noted that the AO had added a significant amount to the petitioner's taxable income under Section 92CA(4) concerning compensation received on demerger. The court agreed with the petitioner's contention that the AO should have allowed an opportunity to explain before making the addition.

Availability of Alternate Remedy Before the Dispute Resolution Panel:
The respondents argued that the petitioner should seek redressal before the Dispute Resolution Panel instead of filing a writ petition. However, the court found merit in the petitioner's arguments and issued notice for further examination.

Addition to Taxable Income on Account of International Transactions:
The total addition made to the petitioner's taxable income on account of international transactions was substantial. The petitioner's grievance primarily focused on the specific amount added related to compensation received on demerger, which the TPO had left open for examination by the AO.

Examination of the Petitioner's Grievance Regarding Compensation Received on Demerger:
Given the complexity of the issues and the need for further examination, the court issued notice for the matter. A stay was ordered on the operation of the draft assessment order dated 24.04.2021, considering the substantial addition made to the petitioner's income. The case was listed for further hearing on a specified date.

---