2025 (10) TMI 49

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Petitioner under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("IT Act"). The Assessment Year in question is A.Y.2017-18. 3. According to the Petitioner, on 30th November 2017, the Petitioner had filed its return of income declaring its income as "NIL" after a set off of the brought forward loss of Rs. 17.14 Crores. Subsequently, the Petitioner's case was selected for scrutiny, and notices were issued in that regard. Thereafter, assessment proceedings were completed and an order was passed on 24th June 2021 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) of the IT Act. Under this Assessment Order, an addition of Rs. 31.15 Crores, on account of a Transfer Pricing Adjustment, was made. 4. Being aggrieved by this order, the Petitioner preferr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct. 6. This apart, it was the contention of the Petitioner that it was mandatory for the officer levying the penalty to grant a virtual hearing to the Petitioner before passing the impugned penalty order. This submission was made on the basis of the Faceless Penalty (Amendment) Scheme, 2022 formulated by the CBDT. This, according to the Petitioner, itself vitiated the penalty order as there was a breach of hearing been given to the Petitioner though asked for. It is for all these reasons that the Petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned penalty order dated 24th March 2025. 7. In the above Writ Petition, the 1st Respondent has filed an affidavit-in-reply dated 5th September 2025. In the affidavit-in-reply a preliminary objection is ta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Petitioner has entered into an APA with the CBDT on 21st December 2021. It is also not in dispute that as per the provisions of Section 92CD(1), the Petitioner filed its return of income on 30th March 2022 and offered to tax a sum of approximately Rs. 14.16 Crores towards Transfer Pricing Adjustment as per the APA entered into between the Petitioner and the CBDT. The tax on this amount has also been paid by the Petitioner as admitted by the Revenue in its affidavit-in-reply. It is also an admitted fact that no order has been passed under Section 92CD(3) on the modified return of income filed by the Petitioner. We find that all these facts have not been taken into consideration by Respondent No.1 before passing the impugned penalty order. ....