2025 (3) TMI 1594

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. The application stands disposed of. ITA 33/2025 & CM APPL. 8962/2025 3. Present appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the 'Act') assailing the impugned order dated 19.09.2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereafter the 'ITAT') in ITA No. 376/Del/2015; and declaration that the final assessment order dated 27.11.2014 as also the rectified final assessment order dated 04.12.2014 are null and void. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the final assessment order dated 27.11.2014 is invalid, null and void being in gross violation of the express requirement in Section 144C(10) of the Act which provides that every direction of the Dispute Resolution Panel (he....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ad misread the directions of the DRP and consequently passed the final assessment order dated 27.11.2014 inadvertently, without executing the DRP's directions. However, realizing the error committed by him, the AO immediately passed a rectified final assessment order dated 04.12.2014. Mr. Maratha further submits that the said rectification order was passed under the provisions of Section 154 of the Act which empowers the AO to rectify any mistake apparent from record and amend the order so passed, on its own motion. It is stated that having rectified the error made and passing a fresh order dated 04.12.2014 in compliance with the directions of DRP, there is no violation of Section 144C(10) of the Act. 8. On the argument of learned counse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alid in law. Undoubtedly, in terms of Section 144C(10), the directions, if any, issued by the DRP are to be mandatorily followed and implemented by the TPO/AO. The provision does not appear to brook any ambiguity. The submission of learned senior standing counsel for Revenue predicated on exercise of power of rectification under Section 154 of the Act post such violation of mandate under Section 144C(10), prima facie, would not validate the violation of such provision. Moreover, the submission based on Section 154(7) of the Act providing AO with a time limit of 4 years to rectify the mistake in an order, would only enure in case the original assessment order has not violated any mandatory provision. In the present case, at the interim stage....