Demand for AY 2013-14 prima facie contrary to tribunal order; respondents must consider representation and follow strict timelines

HC found the demand for AY 2013-14 prima facie contrary to the Appellate Tribunal's order and directed respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.06.2023. The first respondent must dispose the representation within six weeks of receiving the order; the second respondent must give effect to that disposal within twelve weeks; the first respondent shall pass the appropriate assessment order within four weeks thereafter. Communication to the concerned officer(s) is required, and any adjustment for AY 2013-14 may occur only after those orders are passed.

---

---

Issues involved: Challenge to Draft Assessment Order under Income Tax Act, Transfer Pricing Adjustment, Disallowance of Research and Development expenses, Timely passing of Assessment Order after Tribunal's decision, Clarity on demanded amount post-Appellate Tribunal decision.

The petitioner challenged the Draft Assessment Order under the Income Tax Act, which included Transfer Pricing Adjustment and disallowance of Research and Development expenses. The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal regarding Transfer Pricing Adjustment but remitted the disallowance of research and development expenses back to the first respondent for further consideration.

After the Appellate Tribunal's decision, the first respondent's office demanded outstanding amounts for multiple assessment years. The petitioner, dissatisfied with the demand, filed a writ petition seeking a Mandamus for timely assessment order issuance post-Tribunal decision.

The petitioner argued that the first respondent failed to pass a fresh Assessment Order within the required timeframe after the Tribunal's decision. The petitioner emphasized the need for the second respondent to give effect to the Tribunal's order before the first respondent issues a new Assessment Order.

The respondents opposed the writ petition, questioning the clarity of the demanded amount vis-a-vis the Tribunal's decision. Despite this, the court deemed it appropriate to issue a Mandamus for the respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation.

The court directed the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation within six weeks and the second respondent to give effect to the Tribunal's order within twelve weeks. Subsequently, the first respondent was instructed to pass an appropriate assessment order within four weeks.

The order was to be communicated to the concerned parties, and adjustment of due amounts for the Assessment Year 2013-2014 was to occur only after the requisite orders were passed within the stipulated timelines.

The Writ Petition was disposed of with the specified directions, without any costs, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition was closed accordingly.

---