TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 747
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....respectively. Since the assessee has raised the identical grounds in all the appeals, they are clubbed, heard together and disposed off in this consolidated order. Considering the similarity of the issues involved in all the appeals under consideration, we shall take up ITA No. 245/Viz/2023 (AY 2013-14) as a lead appeal. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Authorized Representative submitted that there is a delay of 29 days in filing all the appeals under consideration before the Hon'ble Tribunal. In this regard, the Ld. AR drew our attention to the Affidavits filed by the assessee along with the Petitions seeking condonation of delay and read out the reasons mentioned therein, which are similar in all the AYs under consideration. For the sake of reference, the relevant portions of the affidavit are extracted herein below: " ............ A. The appellant is unaware about the receipt of order since no SMS message has been received to his mobile stating that the appellate order has been uploaded. B. Subsequently, my Chartered Accountant who is Authorized Representative approached the Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) and obtained physical copy of the appellate order on 31/7/2023. C. On pursuance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....22 and served on the assessee. In response, the assessee-company filed its return of income on 14/02/2022 declaring NIL income admitting that Place of Effective Management [POEM] is applicable for the current Assessment Year 2013-14. Subsequently, notices U/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served on the assessee. In response, the assessee's Representative filed its reply on 14/2/2022. Another notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act was issued on 28/03/2022. In response, the Assessee's Representative appeared and filed certain submissions before the Ld. AO. Considering the replies and the statements recorded U/s. 132 of the Act, the Ld. AO, rejecting the explanation and submissions of the assessee, considered Rs. 11,48,96,159/- as income in the hands of M/s. Polisetty Somasundaram Global Limited on protective basis. Aggrieved by the addition of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), after examining the submissions made by the Assessee's Representative, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and has raised 9 grounds on various issues. However, additionally, the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....International Taxation-1, Chennai in ITA No. 818/Mds/2015 (AY 2010-11), dated 30.12.2016. The Ld. AR also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sinogas Management PTE Ltd vs. DCIT &Anr in W.P. (C) 1879/2023, dated 18/10/2023. Further, the Ld. AR also relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. CWT India Private Limited vs. ACIT in W.P. No. 1784 of 2022, dated 4th September, 2023. It is the prayer of the Ld. AR that in all the above cited decisions, it was categorically held that failure to adhere to the mandatory requirement of section 144C(1) of the Act and failure to pass a draft assessment order, would result in invalidation of the final assessment order and the consequent demand notice and penalty proceedings. The Ld. AR also relied on the following case laws viz., (i) Judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Control Risks India Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT , dated 27/07/2017 (ii) Judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of JCB India Ltd vs. DCIT, dated 7/9/2017; (iii) Judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. C-Sam (India) Pvt Ltd [2017] 398 ITR 182 (Guj.), dated 31/07/2017 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ence, we hereby extract below the provisions of section 144C of the Act: "Reference to dispute resolution panel. 144C. (1) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, in the first instance, forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment (hereafter in this section referred to as the draft order) to the eligible assesseeif he proposes to make, on or after the 1st day of October, 2009, any variation which is prejudicial to the interest of such assessee. (2) On receipt of the draft order, the eligible assessee shall, within thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order,- (a) file his acceptance of the variations to the Assessing Officer; or (b) file his objections, if any, to such variation with,- (i) the Dispute Resolution Panel; and (ii) the Assessing Officer. (3) ....... (4) ....... (5) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall, in a case where any objection is received under sub-section (2), issue such directions, as it thinks fit, for the guidance of the Assessing Officer to enable him to complete the assessment. (6) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall issue the directions referred to in sub-section (5), af....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the SLP filed by the Revenue against the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh (supra) has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide the judgment in Special Leave (Civil) CC 16694/2013, dated 27/09/2013. Further, the reliance placed by the Ld. AR in the case of M/s. CWT India Private Limited vs. ACIT (supra) the Hon'ble High Court of Bombayhas observed as follows: "7. It is clear that the AO shall, in the first instance, forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment to the eligible assessee if he proposes to make any variation is prejudicial to the interest of such assessee. Certainly there is a variation in the assessment order different from what was filed in the return of income and since it is by way of an addition made, the variation is prejudicial to the interest of Petitioner. In Andrew Telecommunications Private Limited (Supra) also the facts were identical. The Court relying on the judgments in the case of International Air Transport Association v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax 3 of this Court and in the case of Zuari Cement Ltd v ACIT 4 of the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Andra Pradesh High Court has held that 'the failure to pass a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he case of Zuari Cement Ltd. v. ACIT [WP(C) No. 5557 of 2012, dated 21-02-2013] by the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court which also held that the failure to pass a draft assessment order under Section 144C(1) of the Act would result in rendering the final assessment as one without jurisdiction. This position of law is settled. xxxxxxxxxx 20. In the case of JCB India Ltd. (supra) the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in identical circumstances has held that after the remand on facts, the draft assessment order was necessary." (emphasis supplied) Further, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sinogas Management PTE Ltd (supra) has held as under: "11. For the foregoing reasons, we hold that failure by Respondent No.1 to adhere to the mandatory requirement of section 144C(1) of the Act and pass a draft assessment order, would result in invalidation of the final assessment order and the consequent demand and penalty proceedings." From the above judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay (supra) and Hon'ble High Court of Delhi (supra), it is clear and settled law that the failure on the part of the Ld. AO to pass a draft assessment order U/s. 144C(1) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-19) (supra) and the instant case of the assessee in ITA No.245/Viz/2023 (AY: 2013-14). Therefore, we respectfully following the decision of this Bench in the assessee's own case for the AY 2018-19 (supra) as well as strictly following the principle of consistency, considering the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the assessment order passed by the Ld. AO in the instant case of the assessee is without jurisdiction and in violation of the mandatory provisions of section 144C(1) of the Act and therefore the assessment order passed U/s. 153C of the Act is null and void and unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the legal ground raised by the assessee deserves to be allowed thereby warranting quashing of the assessment order passed by the Ld.AO. It is ordered accordingly. 9. Since, the assessment order passed by the Ld. AO U/s. 153C of the Act, dated 31/03/2022 has been quashed considering the legal ground raised by the assessee in foregoing paragraphs of this order, the original grounds of appeal raised by the assessee on merits need no separate adjudication. Accordingly, the original grounds of appeal raised by the assessee....