Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the final assessment orders passed under section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with section 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are barred by limitation and therefore void for want of jurisdiction.
Analysis: The Tribunal examined the interplay between section 144C and section 153, having regard to the statutory timelines for draft orders, DRP directions and finalisation of assessment. The Tribunal considered the Madras High Court decision in Roca Bathroom Products P. Ltd., which held that sections 144C and 153 are mutually inclusive and that the outer time limits under section 153 apply to proceedings remanded to DRP/AO; it also considered the Department's contention that section 144C is a self-contained code with its own timelines and the objections based on pendency before the Supreme Court. The Tribunal rejected the preliminary objection to adjudication, followed the reasoning in Roca Bathroom that the limitation period for finalising assessment on remand must be determined with reference to section 144C read with section 153, and compared the uncontested date charts showing the dates of draft order, DRP directions, statutory due dates and actual dates of final orders in the appeals. On those facts, the final assessment orders were found to have been passed after the applicable limitation period prescribed by section 144C(13) r.w.s. 153.
Conclusion: The final assessment orders passed beyond the period of limitation under section 144C(13) read with section 153 are without jurisdiction and are quashed; decision is in favour of the assessee.