Limitation for passing final assessment orders under section 144C(13) vis-à-vis section 153 held to govern jurisdiction and lead to quashing where time barred

Interplay between limitation for passing final assessment orders under section 144C(13) and section 153 is addressed, concluding that the timeline for completing final assessments must be determined by reading the provisions together where they overlap; because the provisions are mutually inclusive as they both relate to transfer pricing proceedings under section 92CA, limitation for passing final assessment orders is governed by section 144C read with section 153, resulting in final assessment orders passed beyond that combined limitation period being without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the final assessment orders passed under section 144C(13) read with section 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13, which were issued beyond the applicable period of limitation, are without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

Analysis: The dispute concerns the temporal interplay between section 144C (the DRP framework with in-built timelines) and section 153 (general outer time-limits for completion of assessment). The Tribunal examined the legislative scheme of section 144C, the presence of non-obstante language, and the timelines prescribed for draft order, filing of objections, DRP directions and finalisation of assessment. The Tribunal considered binding and persuasive authorities addressing whether the outer time limits under section 153 apply to proceedings remanded involving DRP, including the Madras High Court decision in Roca Bathroom Products P. Ltd., and contrasted those with the Revenue's submissions that section 144C is a self-contained code whose timelines operate independently. The Tribunal evaluated undisputed date charts for AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13 showing due dates computed with reference to section 144C(13) read with section 153 and the actual dates on which final orders were passed, and applied the legal conclusion that proceedings remanded and processed via DRP remain subject to the outer limitation under section 153 and to the statutory timelines embedded in section 144C.

Conclusion: The final assessment orders for AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13, having been passed beyond the period of limitation determined with reference to section 144C(13) read with section 153, are without jurisdiction and are quashed; accordingly the appeals are allowed in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where assessment proceedings involve remand to the DRP under section 144C, the period of limitation for passing the final assessment order must be determined with reference to section 144C read with section 153; final orders passed beyond the applicable limitation are without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

---