TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 1419
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f software development services and business process & computer services to its associated enterprises. The petitioner is a 100% export-oriented unit (EOU) and in connection with its business activities, they obtained registration as a new Software Technology Park of India (STPI) unit in Techno Park, Thiruvananthapuram. Being a 100% export-oriented unit, the petitioner was claiming the benefit of deduction envisaged under Section 10B of the Act. Subject to the compliance of the conditions under Section 10B of the Act, the said deduction was to run consecutively for a period of ten years. For the assessment year 2009-10, the petitioner filed return on 29.09.2009 declaring a total income of Rs. 66,66,453/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices dated 01.09.2010 and 23.06.2011 under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act respectively were issued. Since the petitioner had entered into international transactions with its associated enterprises, the file was referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer under Section 92CA of the Act to determine the Arm's Length Price (for short, "ALP") in respect of such transactions. The Transfer Pricing Officer, vide order dated 24.01.2013....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court, alleging that Ext. P4 order of assessment issued under Section 144C(13) of the Act is patently without jurisdiction. 3. Heard Sri. M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; and Sri. Ravindranatha Menon, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Ext. P4 order issued by the third respondent was beyond the time frame stipulated under Section 144C(13) of the Act, and therefore, non-est. Ext. P3 order of the DRP is dated 09.12.2013. According to the learned counsel, Ext. P4 order, in order to conform to the statutory time frame envisaged under Section 144C(13) of the Act, must have been received by the assessing authority either during December, 2013 or during January, 2014. Ext. P4 order does not reveal the date of receipt of Ext. P3 order by the assessing authority and the absence of evidence on the part of the third respondent to adduce proof showing the date of receipt of Ext. P3 order to rebut the challenge made against Ext. P4 order on the ground of limitation, totally justifies the case of the petitioner that Ext. P4 order is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er the same is procedural or substantive. Section 144B is a similar provision as it stood then, a provision with a non-obstante clause, and this Court, in several cases, have interpreted the said provision and found the same to be illegal. To substantiate the above contentions, the learned Standing Counsel relied on Panchamahal Steel Ltd. v. U.A. Josehi, ITO & Another [1997 (225) ITR 458]. 6. The issues that arise for consideration are whether the assessing authority, while passing an order under Section 144C of the Act is bound to comply with the time frame stipulated under Section 144C(13) of the Act and whether the impugned order passed by the assessing authority was without jurisdiction. 7. Ext. P3 directions issued by the DRP under Section 144C(5) r/w sub-section 8 of Section 144C of the Act is dated 09.12.2013. For a better understanding, it is relevant to extract Section 144C of the Act, which reads thus; 144C. Reference to dispute resolution panel.- (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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e variations proposed in the draft order so, however, that it shall not set aside any proposed variation or issue any direction under subsection (5) for further enquiry and passing of the assessment order. (9) If the members of the Dispute Resolution Panel differ in opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members. (10) Every direction issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel shall be binding on the Assessing Officer. (11) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued unless an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee and the Assessing Officer on such directions which are prejudicial to the interest of the assessee or the interest of the revenue, respectively. (12) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued after nine months from the end of the month in which the draft order is forwarded to the eligible assessee. (13) Upon receipt of the directions issued under sub-section (5), the Assessing Officer shall, in conformity with the directions, complete, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 153 or section 153B, the assessment without provid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection (6), the DRP shall issue directions referred to in sub-section (5) after considering the draft order, objections filed by the assessee, evidence furnished by the assessee etc. The DRP, before issuing any direction to the assessing authority, has to make further enquiry as it thinks fit. Also, as per sub-section (8), the DRP may confirm, reduce or enhance the variations proposed in the draft order. In subsection (9), it is stated that if the members of the DRP differ in opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members. As per sub-section (10), every direction issued by the DRP shall be binding on the assessing officer. As per subsection (11), without affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessing officer, no direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued by the DRP. It is stated in sub-section (12) that no direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued after nine months from the end of the month, in which the draft order is forwarded to the eligible assessee. The provision in dispute, i.e., sub-section (13), states that on receipt of the directions issued under subsection (5) from the DRP, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect the essentiality of the time factor, in which proceedings contemplated under Section 144C are to be completed by the respective authorities. A dilution of the time limits envisaged under the statutory frame work of Section 144C would, therefore, defeat the very purpose and object behind the insertion of the said provision. Section 153 of the Act deals with the time limit contemplated for the completion of assessments and re-assessments under the Act. It is relevant to note that in addition to the non-obstante clause under Section 144C(1) with respect to other provisions of the Act, there is a specific exclusion of the application of Section 153 from the frame work of Section 144C. This specific exclusion of Section 153 from the proceedings under Section 144C, exemplifies the rigour of the specific time limits provided under Section 144C. Under Section 153 of the Act, longer time limit is prescribed, whereas, specific time limit is prescribed under Section 144C of the Act. The specific exclusion of Section 153 from the ambit of Section 144C is a conscious action of the lawmaker. If the legislature does not have any intention to stick on with the time limit prescribed in Section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. P3 proceedings by the assessing officer issued by the DRP. No reasons have been stated in the order as to the delay in passing Ext. P4 order and non compliance of the statutory provisions envisaged under Section 144C. The fundamental principle of interpretation is to assign words, their natural, original and precise meaning, provided that the words are clear and take into account the purpose of the statute. It is settled that the provisions should be examined in their literal sense and given their natural effect. This is the elementary golden rule of interpretation of statutes. Sub-section (13) of Section 144C is thus very clear that upon receipt of the directions issued under sub-section (5), the assessing officer shall, in conformity with the directions, complete the assessment without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 153 or section 153B, within one month from the end of the month in which such direction is received. There is no requirement of dwell in further inductive analysis of the above provision. The assessing officer has not filed any counter affidavit to affirm the date, on w....