Assessment Order Overturned: Court Finds Objection Filing Process Unreasonable, Remands for New Order per Panel Directions.

The court set aside the assessment order finalized by the assessing authority, which incorrectly claimed that no objections were filed by the petitioner, a Non-Resident Indian, regarding the draft assessment order. The court found the assessing authority's requirement for filing objections with both the Dispute Resolution Panel and itself unreasonable. It emphasized that the Panel had already issued directions after considering the objections. Consequently, the matter was remanded to the assessing authority to issue a new assessment order in accordance with the Panel's directions. The writ petition was allowed, despite arguments that the order was appealable under Section 246A.

---

---

Issues Involved:
- Finalizing assessment order under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act
- Filing objection to draft assessment order before Dispute Resolution Panel and assessing authority
- Correctness of assessing authority's finding on objection filing
- Appealability of assessment order under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act

Summary:
The petitioner, a Non-Resident Indian, filed a return of income for the assessment year 2014-15. A draft assessment order was served proposing additions against long term capital gains. The petitioner objected to the draft assessment order before the Dispute Resolution Panel within the specified time. However, the assessing authority finalized the assessment order claiming no objection was filed. The Dispute Resolution Panel later issued directions. The assessing authority contended that objections should have been filed before both the Panel and the assessing authority. The court noted that the assessing authority's expectation for objections before both entities was unreasonable. The court found the assessing authority's conclusion on objection filing to be incorrect and technical. The court emphasized that the Dispute Resolution Panel had already considered the objections and issued directions. The assessing authority's decision was deemed incorrect, and the assessment order was set aside. The matter was remanded to the assessing authority to issue a fresh assessment order in line with the Panel's directions. The court allowed the writ petition on these grounds. The Income Tax Department argued that the assessment order was appealable under Section 246A, suggesting the petitioner should have pursued that route instead of approaching the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

---