TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 1936
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....have certain sub-parts to them, it has been vehemently argued that the Ld. AO's order dated 07.11.2024 was time- barred. It has been requested by the Ld. AR that this issue should be adjudicated first and thereafter, if required, rest of the issues may be taken up. 2.1 Regarding the issue of Ld. AO's order being barred by limitation, the assessee is seen to have taken this as the main plea for the stay application as also in the quantum appeal. Briefly, as has already been mentioned earlier, the Ld. DRP passed the order on which the date of 30.09.2024 has been appended. This was followed by the assessment order u/s 144C(13) read with section 143(3) of the Act dated 07.11.2024. The Ld. AR argued that as per the provision of section 144C(13) of the Act, the Ld. AO at best could have passed the order by 31.01.2024. The Ld. AR displayed a printout of the ITBA as under: It was pointed out that the Ld. AO received the said DRP's order on 30.09.2024 itself. The Ld. AR also relied on the case of Ramco Cement Ltd. reported in 171 taxmann.com 306 (Madras) and read out extensively from various portions of the said judgment in support of his claim that the date of issue of the DRP order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ete the final assessment as per Section 144C(13) of the Act, within one month from the end of the month in which the directions of the DRP are received. 8. It is the case of the assessee that the directions had been uploaded on 31.01.2022 and hence the limitation for passing of a final assessment order had expired by 28.02.2022, whereas, it is the case of the Assessing Officer that the directions of the DRP had been received on 03.02.2022 and hence, he had had time till 31.03.2022 to complete the assessment. The sequence of dates and events hence assumes some importance, as does the procedure followed by the department for uploading/service of orders on the assessing officers in such matters. ...................................... 13. Time was sought and granted on subsequent occasions to enable the concerned authorities to file affidavits clarifying the stand of the Department in regard to the date that should be reckoned for the commencement of limitation under Section 144C(13) of the Act. ............................ 18. The sole issue to be decided is the point of initiation of limitation for passing a Final Assessment Order. Section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is to be completed within one month from the end of the month in which the DRP issues directions". Therefore, the AO-Assessment Unit received Directions of the DRP only on 03.02.2022, hence one month from the end of the month of receipt of DRP directions would be 31.3.2022. (i.e.) date of limitation for completion of assessment is 31.3.2022. The assessment order in the instant case has been passed on 22.3.2022, which is well before the date of limitation. Therefore, final assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. u/s 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Act passed by the Assessment Unit on 22.03.2022 is not barred by limitation.' 21. The communication from the DRP to the Tribunal confirms the position that the Directions of the DRP had been uploaded in the Income Tax Business Application (ITBA) on 31.01.2022 itself. Since the ITBA portal can be accessed by both the assessee as well as the Assessing Officer on their furnishing necessary credentials, the point that remains to be determined is how there could be two dates, i.e., 31.01.2022 and 03.02.2022, when the same order was served upon the FAO and which date is to be reckoned as the point of commencement of limitation. .......
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to key in the concerned PAN number of the assessee, such that, panoramic, 360 degree visibility is available to the officer to view the DRP directions as and when uploaded, which, in this case, is on 31.01.2022. In the present case, order of assessment dated 22.03.2022 has been passed (per serial no.12 of assessment order dated 22.3.2022) under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C (13) read with Section 144B of the Act. This provision requires an assessment to be framed only in faceless mode by an FAO and in fact, it is the FAO who has framed the assessment. 29. The Advisory makes it clear that the FAO would be able to view the DRP order in the 360 degree screen, since the assessment was pending with that officer. This feature has evidently been provided to ensure that an officer can access/receive the directions of the DRP as soon as it is uploaded by the Secretariat of the DRP and the pending proceedings would be completed within the statutory limitation provided. 30. Hence, there is no protection available to the Department by the DRP user having selected the second manual option, as, an assessing officer, in order to ensure that the assessment proceedings a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... timelines for completion of an assessment. Hence the stipulation in regard to limitation cannot be reckoned in a manner so as to give rise to more than one interpretation, where either party can take benefit of a later date. 39. This issue has also attracted the attention of the Bombay and Delhi High Courts in Vodafone Idea Ltd. v. Central Processing Centre [2023] 156 taxmann.com 258/459 ITR 413 (Bombay) and Louis Dreyfus Company India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Manu/DE/4671/2024/[2024] 159 taxmann.com 244/464 ITR 595 (Delhi)). In both the cases, the very submissions as made before us, were advanced and have been rejected by those Courts." 3.1 It is seen that the Hon'ble Madras High Court has dwelt extensively on this issue and have taken a considered view on the fact that the date of uploading of the order would also be the date of on which the Ld. AO is supposed to have received the same. Considering that this a clear cut finding we have no hesitation in holding that the Ld. AO's order dated 07.11.2024 was passed beyond the date of limitation and hence deserves to be struck down. 4. Since the assessee has succeeded in the quantum appeal, we do....