Case Law Details
CIT Vs Roca Bathroom Products Private Limited (Madras High Court)
Held that the period of limitation prescribed under Section 153 (2A) or 153 (3) is applicable, when the matters are remanded back irrespective of whether it is to the Assessing Officer or TPO or the DRP, the duty is on the assessing officer to pass orders.
Facts-
The respondent, M/s. Roca Bathroom Products Private Limited, is a private limited company and a subsidiary of Roca Sanitario S.A., Spain. For A.Y. 2009-2010, they filed their return declaring an income of Rs.21,44,96,661/-. Similarly, for AY 2010-2011, they filed their returndeclaring an income of Rs.50,75,32,362/-. The returns of income were taken up for scrutiny and were referred to TPO u/s. 92CA.
The TPO passed an order in respect of AY 2009-2010, making a downward adjustment of Rs.4,66,00,000/- on import of goods. Following the same, the AO passed a draft assessment order dated 30.03.2013, in conformity with the adjustment proposed by the TPO and also made addition for (i)disallowance under Rule 14A (ii) disallowance on connectivity expenses and (iii) disallowance on unabsorbed depreciation of amalgamating company, to which, the respondent submitted their objections before the first appellant / DRP and the Assessing Officer. However, the DRP rejected the same and confirmed the additions made in the draft assessment order and issued directions under section 144C. Based on the same, the second appellant passed the final assessment order on 16.01.2014 and raised a demand u/s 156 of Rs.1,46,07,560/-.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
