TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 825
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent Assessing Officer also on the very same day and therefore, the impugned Assessment Order dated 09.08.2022 which has been passed by the Respondent was beyond the period of limitation prescribed under Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as 'IT Act'). 2.1. The learned counsel for the Petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the information gathered by the Petitioner under the provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005. The Proceedings dated 11.09.2023 of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ) & Secretary, Dispute Resolution Panel - 2, Bengaluru to the Petitioner's RTI Application dated 30.08.2023 reads as under: Sl.No. Information Called for Response (a) What is the procedure for communicating DRP order to the AO, i.e., is the document served electronically or is the document required to be served physically on the NeAC or AO? DRP orders/directions are being sent to the NFAC through ITBA in electronic mode only. If the draft order has been passed by the AO and not by NFAC, orders/directions being sent to the AO through ITBA and also, through DAK. (b) In the instant case, whether the DRP order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nth from the end of the month in which such direction is received." From the above provision, it is evident that the specified time limit is one month from the end of the month in which the directions are received. It is also clear that the time limit should be computed from the date of receipt of directions issued under sub-section (5) thereof. Sub-section (5) of section 144C deals with the issuance of directions by the Dispute Resolution Panel. The admitted position is that the Dispute Resolution Panel issued directions on June 16, 2022 and this fact is borne out by examining the proceedings of the Dispute Resolution Panel, which is contained at page Nos. 122 to 130 of the typed set of papers. The said proceedings also record that the copy of the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel is being forwarded to the assessee, the Assessing Officer and the Transfer Pricing Officer. The Assessing Officer referred to therein is the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. The petitioner has placed on record a communication from the Secretary and Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax to the Dispute Resolution Panel. The said communication states that the Assessing Officer in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te of passing DRP order. This order was uploaded by the Faceless Assessing Unit to the JAO on 04.07.2022. Thus, the DRP order was received by the Assessing Officer only on 04.07.2022." 3.2. Further, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Respondent submitted that whatever is uploaded in the National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi would not automatically stand communicated to the Assessing Officer. Only after the proceedings is communicated to the Transfer Pricing Officer, it is transmitted to the National Faceless Assessment Centre and that the National Faceless Assessing Unit has consolidated the aforesaid proceedings of the Dispute Resolution Panel-2 and transferred the same to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer on 04.07.2022. 3.3. It is submitted that a plain reading of the Intimation Letter dated 22.06.2022 bearing DIN:ITBA/DRP/S/91/2022-23/1043516988(1) would reveal the hollowness of the Petitioner's claim that a different DIN pertaining to the DRP's order dated 10.06.2022 has been mentioned by the Transfer Pricing Officer in their order dated 30.06.2022. The DIN mentioned by the Transfer Pricing Officer vide its order dated 30.06.2022 pertaining to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2022, the Faceless Assessing Officer of the Petitioner had collected the information from the Transfer Pricing Officer as transfer pricing adjustment issues were involved in the present case. After getting the feedback from the Transfer Pricing Officer, the Faceless Assessing Officer of the Petitioner had transmitted the DRP's order dated 10.06.2022 to the Respondent on 04.07.2022. Therefore, it is submitted that the Advisory of the ITBA team which has been captured in Paragraph No.26 of the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s.Ramco Cements Limited (T.C.A.No.192 of 2024 dated 19.12.2024) itself answered that the Respondent would not have accessed the DRP's order dated 10.06.2022 which was uploaded in the ITBA portal on 22.06.2022. 3.9. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Respondent also submitted that the impugned Assessment Order dated 19.08.2022 was well within the time as the last date for passing the Assessment Order would have expired on 31.08.2022 i.e., one month from the end of the date of receipt of the DRP's order dated 10.06.2022. Therefore, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have considered the arguments advanced by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the judgment, the Division Bench has extracted a Unmasking Report of the Faceless Assessing Officer. Paragraph No.23 of the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s.Ramco Cements Limited (T.C.A.No.192 of 2024 dated 19.12.2024) is usefully extracted hereunder:- "23. For the first time in the proceedings, the FAO places on record the Unmasking Report (Report) as part of his affidavit dated 17.12.2024. Since the Report would be critical to determine the question before us, we extract the same in full: 1) Visibility of the DRP order in the Case History/Notings (CHN) of the pending assessment proceedings: The DRP Order passed in ITBA software is reflected automatically in the pending assessment work-item (pending either with FAO or JAO), if DRP user initiates DRP proceedings in the ITBA DRP Module, by using the option of selecting the Draft Order u/s 144C in the screen. When DRP proceedings are initiated in this manner, this crates linkage with the Assessment Module and hence when DRP passes the order u/s 144C (5), such order is automatically reflected in the Case History Noting of AO (FAO or JAO) with whom the assessment work-item is pending. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de inputs regarding the workflows in ITBA software and information in respect of any proceedings as available in ITBA system. The administrative/legal aspects vest with the authorities concerned. Regards, Pritpal Singh ADIT (ITBA)-5 O/o CIT (ITBA) Directorate of Income Tax (Systems)" 9. A reading of the above Unmasking Report of the Faceless Assessing Officer indicates that the DRP's order passed under Section 144C (5) of the IT Act is automatically reflected in the Case History/Noting of the Assessing Officer (Faceless Assessing Officer or Jurisdictional Assessing Officer) with whom the assessment work-item is pending. It also indicates that where the DRP user initiates DRP proceedings by using the option of manually entering the details of the case in the screen, the DRP's order passed does not reflect automatically inside the case history noting of pending Assessment Proceedings work-item of the AO (Faceless Assessing Officer or Jurisdictional Assessing Officer). It further indicates that in the aforesaid case, as per inputs of the technical team, the DRP created the pendency by manually entering the details of the 144C ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of the DRP was received. If the date of communication of the DRP's proceedings is taken as 22.06.2022, the last date for passing the impugned Assessment Order would have expired on 30.07.2022. 16. On the other hand, if the date of communication of the DRP's proceedings from the National Faceless Assessment Centre by the Respondent Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is taken as 04.07.2022 as stated by the Respondent, the last date for passing the impugned Assessment Order would have expired on 31.08.2022 and since the final Assessment Order has been passed on 19.08.2022, it would be in time. 17. The information that has been obtained by Petitioner from the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ) & Secretary, Dispute Resolution Panel - 2, Bengaluru vide Proceedings dated 11.09.2023 clearly indicates that in the case of Petitioner herein, the DRP's proceedings was issued to the National Faceless Assessment Centre. It has also been clarified that in response to Question at S.No.(d), the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ) Dispute Resolution Panel has categorically stated that the situation contemplated in Question at S.No.(d) was not applicable, implying the o....