AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 1460
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rounds relate to adjustment of Arm's Length Price (ALP). The assessee has also filed additional grounds vide its letter dated 16.02.2021. The assessee in its petition for admission of additional ground submits that the issues raised in the additional grounds is purely legal issue and would not require any investigation of fresh facts. In this context, the learned AR has relied on various case laws. The learned Departmental Representative was duly heard. 2.1 The issue raised in the additional grounds are two folds, namely, (i) the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) erred in dismissing the objections of the assessee in limine without condoning the delay of 3 days in filing the objections before the Panel; (ii) the assessment order dated 30.09.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave power to condone the delay in filing the objections by the assessee before the Panel. Pursuant to the DRP's rejection of objections, final assessment order was passed on 30.09.2016. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal to the ITAT. The learned AR has filed paper book-I enclosing therein the objections filed before the DRP, copy of the written submissions filed before the TPO, etc. (all these pertain to the issue on merits with regard to the transfer pricing adjustment). As regards the additional grounds (legal issue), the assessee submitted that there was a delay in filing objections before the DRP by 3 days. However, it was contended that the DRP ought to have condoned the delay of 3 days in filing the objections before the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee; and (ii) whether the ITAT can hold the final assessment order dated 30.09.2016 as barred by limitation. 6.1 As regards the first issue is concerned, the learned AR admitted that there was a delay in filing the objections before the DRP by 3 days (the assessee has to file objections before the DRP u/s 144C(2)(b) of the I.T.Act within 30 days from the date of receipt of draft assessment order). The further question is whether the DRP has power to condone the delay. The DRP derives its authorities and powers from the provisions of section 144C of the I.T.Act and its procedures are governed by Income Tax (Dispute Resolution Panel) Rules, 2009. The provisions of the Act or Rule do not give power to the DRP to condone any delay in filing t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....RP (refer section 253(1)(d) of the I.T. Act; or (ii) from an order of CIT(A) (refer section 253(1)(a) of the I.T.Act. The DRP having only rejected the objections on the ground of limitation. The DRP did not issue any directions to the AO as contemplated u/s 144C(5) of the I.T.Act. In this case, the final assessment order dated 30.09.2016 was not pursuant to the direction of DRP. Therefore, the correct course open for the assessee would have been to file an appeal before the CIT(A) and pursue the said issue. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Inno Estates (P.) Ltd (supra) had also decided the above issue indirectly. In the case considered by the Hon'ble High Court, the Advocate for the assessee submitted that the appeal would lie t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommissioner of Income Tax, whereas an appeal from an order passed by an Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) or Section 147 or Section 153A or Section 153C in pursuance of the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel lies before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 22. The question before us is whether the order of assessment impugned is an order in pursuance of directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel. 23. In a case where objection is received, the Dispute Resolution Panel might issue such directions as it might think for the guidance of the Assessing Officer to enable him to complete the assessment [Section 144C(5)]. The directions referred to in Section 144C(5) of the 1961 Act are to be issued after considering (i) the draft or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ling the objection. 28. When an objection is filed before the Dispute Resolution Panel beyond the stipulated time of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, there is no objection before the Dispute Resolution Panel in the eye of law. 29. An order of rejection of an objection on the ground of the same being barred by limitation is not a direction under subsection 5 read with sub-section 6 to Section 144C of the 1961 Act. Though the impugned order dated 1 0.l1.20 16 rejecting the objection on the ground of the bar of limitation is captioned as a direction under Section 144C(5) of the 1961 Act, it is not in fact a direction under Section 144C(5). The quoting ofa wrong provision in an order is a mistake apparent on the face of ....