https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459367 The ITAT Delhi held that an assessment order u/s 144C was barred by limitation. The tribunal applied the ratio from VRA Cotton Mills case regarding the meaning of "served" in notice provisions, determining that actual receipt rather than mere dispatch is required. The DRP directions were communicated on 30.11.2021, making the subsequent assessment order dated 31.01.22 time-barred. The tribunal considered provisions relating to electronic record dispatch and receipt under IT Act, 2000 s.132, and decided in favor of the assessee on limitation grounds. en-us Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Dec 2024 19:00:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459367 The ITAT Delhi held that an assessment order u/s 144C was barred by limitation. The tribunal applied the ratio from VRA Cotton Mills case regarding the meaning of "served" in notice provisions, determining that actual receipt rather than mere dispatch is required. The DRP directions were communicated on 30.11.2021, making the subsequent assessment order dated 31.01.22 time-barred. The tribunal considered provisions relating to electronic record dispatch and receipt under IT Act, 2000 s.132, and decided in favor of the assessee on limitation grounds. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459367