Facts of the
Case
The assessee, Wickwood Development Ltd., is a
company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. A search and seizure
operation under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 22
March 2012 in the Focus Energy Group. Consequent thereto, notices under Section
153C were issued to the assessee on 18 November 2013 for Assessment Years
2008-09 and 2009-10.
The Assessing Officer made a reference to the
Transfer Pricing Officer to verify the correctness of exploration expenses paid
by the assessee. The assessee objected to the assumption of jurisdiction and
thereafter filed its return of income in response to the notice under Section
153C.
The Assessing Officer passed final assessment
orders under Section 153C read with Section 144 without issuing a draft
assessment order under Section 144C. Additions of substantial amounts were
made. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the assessee’s appeal.
The Revenue challenged the same before the ITAT, while the assessee filed
cross-objections.
The ITAT allowed the assessee’s objections holding
that issuance of a draft assessment order was mandatory. Aggrieved, the Revenue
filed appeals before the Delhi High Court.
Issues
Involved
Whether Section 144C of the
Income-tax Act applies to assessments framed under Section 153C.
Whether the assessee qualified as
an “eligible assessee” under Section 144C(15)(b) of the Act.
Whether failure to issue a draft
assessment order renders the final assessment order void.
Whether the ITAT was justified in
allowing the assessee’s objections without adjudicating the merits of
additions.
Petitioner’s
(Revenue’s) Arguments
The Revenue contended that Section 144C was not
applicable to the assessee since income was deemed to accrue in India only due
to underlying assets or source of income. It was argued that the assessee did
not qualify as an “eligible assessee” within the meaning of Section 144C(15).
The Revenue further submitted that the ITAT erred
in allowing the assessee’s objections solely on procedural grounds without
examining the merits of the additions made in the assessment orders.
Respondent’s
(Assessee’s) Arguments
The assessee argued that being a non-resident
company and having been subjected to transfer pricing reference, it squarely
fell within the definition of “eligible assessee” under Section 144C(15)(b).
It was contended that issuance of a draft
assessment order under Section 144C is mandatory and confers a substantive
right to approach the Dispute Resolution Panel. Failure to follow this
procedure constitutes a jurisdictional defect rendering the final assessment
order null and void.
The assessee relied on binding precedent of the
Delhi High Court in Turner International India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT to
submit that such defect is incurable.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue’s
appeals and upheld the order of the ITAT. The Court held that Section 144C
applies mandatorily to eligible assessees, including non-residents subjected to
transfer pricing reference, even in proceedings under Section 153C.
The Court reiterated that issuance of a draft
assessment order is a jurisdictional requirement and not a procedural
formality. Failure to comply with Section 144C vitiates the entire assessment
proceedings, leaving no scope for adjudication on merits.
The Court further held that the ITAT was justified
in allowing the assessee’s objections without examining the merits, as the
assessment itself was rendered void ab initio.
Important
Clarification
This judgment authoritatively clarifies that:
Section 144C applies to
assessments framed under Section 153C.
Non-resident assessees subjected
to transfer pricing reference qualify as “eligible assessees”.
Issuance of a draft assessment
order is mandatory and jurisdictional.
Failure to comply with Section
144C cannot be cured and nullifies the final assessment order.
Merits of additions need not be
examined once jurisdictional infirmity is established.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1770194707_PR.COMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX7VsWICKWOODDEVELOPMENTLTD..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general
information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify
the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal,
professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all
liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared
with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment