Case Law Details
Garg Acrylics Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Delhi)
It is the case of the assessee that reference made to the TPO in the instant case without fulfilling the conditions of threshold of Rs.5 crore monetary limit is without the sanction of law in view of the Section 92BA of the Act. This being so, the assessee is not entitled for extension of time limit provided under Section 153(4) of the Act by extended period of another one year which is applicable only where the reference to the TPO has been validly made within the frame work of law.
We find palpable merit in the plea expounded on behalf of the assessee. It has been demonstrated in the instant case that the threshold monetary limit of Rs. 5 crore was not available to the Assessing Officer to characterize the transactions with AE as SDT to enable him to make a reference to the TPO. The order of the TPO under Section 92CA(3) is thus a nonest and a nullity in the eyes of law. Consequently, the extension of time under erstwhile provisions of Section 153 for passing the assessment order based on such nonest order from TPO is not available to the Assessing Officer in the instant case. The Assessing Officer thus could not legitimise the assessment order passed beyond the ordinary time limit of 31.12.2016 available under Section 153 of the Act. The impugned assessment order passed is barred by limitation and hence bad in law and thus requires to be quashed. The other grounds of challenges emanating from such assessment order ipso facto become infructuous.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
The captioned Cross Appeals have been filed by the Assessee and Revenue respectively seeking to challenge the first appellate order of the CIT(A) concerning Assessment Year 2014-15 arising from the assessment order dated 07.03.2018 passed under Section 143(3) of the Act r.w. Section 144C r.w. Section 144B of the Act.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
