TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1527
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) was justified in quashing the assessment order passed by the AO u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA(3) r.w.s. 144 C(3), when the order passed by the AO enhancing the tax liability of the assessee by two times was clearly prejudicial to the interest the assessee? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) was justified in quashing the assessment order passed by the AO without appreciating the fact that - (a) application of tax rate of 20% on the interest income earned by the assessee from India as per the I. T. Act in place of tax rate of 10% on this interest income offered by the assessee, tantamounts to an order / variation which is prejudicia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tent and assessee and such mistake or defect was curable u/s 292B of the IT Act. 6. The Appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the above ground(s) be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 3. The short question that we are really required to adjudicate in this appeal is whether or not learned CIT(A) was justified in holding that the provisions of section 144C did not apply to the fact of this case as there was no variation in the income returned and the income assessed and accordingly the impugned assessment order was time barred. 4. Learned representatives fairly agree that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by a series of order of the coordinate benches including in the cases of IPF India ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Assessing Officer was justified in passing a draft assessment order on the facts of this case, and, whether, the fact that the assessee chose to issue the draft assessment order, even though he was not required to pass the draft assessment order, would result in affecting the normal time limit within which the normal assessment order under section 143(3) is to be issued. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 5. So far as the first issue is concerned, we find that, in the present case, there are no variations in the returned income and the assessee income. The controversy is thus confined to the question as to what....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee. There is, therefore, no question of a draft assessment order being issued in this case. It is also important to note that the Finance Bill proposes to make the issuance of draft assessment orders in the case of eligible assessees mandatory even when there is no variation in the income or loss returned by the assessee but then this amendment seeks to amend the law with effect from 1st April 2020. Explaining this amendment, Memorandum Explaining Amendments in the Finance Bill 2020 states as follows: Amendment in Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). Section 144C of the Act provides that in case of certain eligible assessees, viz., foreign companies and any person in whose case transfer pricing adjustments have been made under sub-s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oint. 7. Coming to the second point, we find that there is no dispute that if no draft assessment order was to be issued in this case, the assessment would have been time barred on 31st December 2017 but the present assessment order is passed on 17th August 2018. Once we hold that no draft assessment order could have been issued in this case, as the provisions of Section 144C(1) could not have been invoked in this case, the time limit of completion of assessment was available only upto 31st December 2017. The mere issuance of draft assessment order, when it was legally not required to be issued, cannot end up enhancing the time limit for completing the assessment under section 143(3). We, therefore, uphold the plea of the assessee on thi....