TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (1) TMI 921
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Assessing Officer: "11. The Appellant submits that the order passed by AO, being beyond the time limit prescribed u/s 144C of the Act, is not valid in law. 12. The Appellant, therefore, submits that the Assessment order may be annulled and that, the additions made may be deleted." 3. The A.R of the assessee has filed written arguments which reads as under: "1. Contention of the Appellant The appellant submits that the assessment order dated 15 June 2012 passed by the learned Assessing Officer ('AO') is time barred as the same is passed beyond the time limit prescribed in section 144C(4) of the Act. 2. Our submissions 2.1 Relevant provisions of section 144C of the Act reproduced....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s assessment order on or before 31.3.2010being one month from the end of month in which the period of filing objections by the assessee (3.2.2010) expires. 2.4 For ease of reference, we have captured the facts of case before your honours alongwith timelines as prescribed under section 144C(2) of the Act and 144C(4) of the Act in the table below: Sr. No Event Date Time limit as prescribed in section 14C of the Act Remarks 1 Draft order passed by the AO Not Applicable Not Applicable 2 Draft order received by the appellant 2 January 2012 Not Applicable Not Applicable 3 Filing of objections by the Appellant with the DRP 13 February 2012 Within 30 days of the receipt of dra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e DRP within 30 days of the receipt of the said order i.e 1.2.2012. The assessee filed the objections before the DRP on 13.2.2012. The DRP passed order on 4.6.2012 dismissing the objections of the assessee on the ground that the assessee had filed its objections against the draft order with delay of 13 days and that there was no liberty with the DRP to condone such delay. After receipt of this order by the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order on 15.6.2012 and hence, the order passed by the Assessing Officer was within the prescribed time u/s 144C(13) which provides that upon receipt of directions issued under sub-section (5), the Assessing Officer shall, in conformity with the directions, complete, notwithsta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rescribed u/s 144C(3) of the Act then the assessee could have filed appeal before the CIT(A) against the said order. He also submitted that he is alive to the fact that on dismissal of the objections by the DRP which were filed before the DRP by a delay of 13 days the assessee can still file its appeal belatedly before the CIT(A) on the ground that it was pursuing with the appeal before a wrong forum and there are orders of the Tribunal and Courts that such delay was condoned and the appeal was admitted for hearing. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities and materials available on record. In the instant case, the undisputed facts are that the draft assessment order was served upon the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssing Officer when such order is passed in pursuance of the directions of the DRP only shall be appealable before the Tribunal and in case of an order passed u/s 143(3) by the Assessing Officer which is not in pursuance to the directions of the DRP, appeal shall not lie against such order directly before the Tribunal. 11. In the instant case, the contention of the A.R of the assessee is that the impugned order passed u/s 143(3) by the Assessing Officer is not an order which is passed in pursuance of the directions of the DRP. However, if the above contention of the assessee is taken as correct then it implies that the assessee is not entitled to file directly appeal before the Tribunal in pursuance to such an order of the Assessing Offic....