Any Order Passed By Referring To Sec 144(C)(1) Should Be Construed Only As Draft Assessment Order: Madras High Court
Pankaj Bajpai
13 March 2024 12:45 PM GMT
While dismissing assessee's petition, the Madras High Court held that the impugned assessment order passed by the respondent/ AO is only a draft assessment order in which case, the petitioner/ assessee should approach the appropriate forum and address their grievance in terms of Section 144 (C) of the Income Tax Act.The Single bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “Though the...
While dismissing assessee's petition, the Madras High Court held that the impugned assessment order passed by the respondent/ AO is only a draft assessment order in which case, the petitioner/ assessee should approach the appropriate forum and address their grievance in terms of Section 144 (C) of the Income Tax Act.
The Single bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “Though the word “draft assessment” is missing, the provision under Section 144 (C) of the Income Tax Act is very much available and any order whatsoever in the form, in the event of the provisions by referring Section 144(C)(1) of the Act, it should be construed only as a draft assessment order. No deficiency or discrepancy could be found in the order for not mentioning the word “draft assessment order” and by virtue of which, it would not get abated”. (Para 12)
The Bench noted the assessee's contentions that AO did not follow the mandatory procedure of passing the draft assessment order u/s 144C and the said order must be construed as final assessment order considering that even though the provisions of Sec.144C(1) were mentioned in the order, the first page of the impugned order did not mention anything about the order passed u/s. 144C(1).
The Bench observed that though the word “draft assessment” is missing, it should be construed only as a draft assessment order.
The Bench therefore concluded that the said assessment order is draft order and assessee, if aggrieved, could approach DRP within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Counsel for Petitioner/ Assessee: P. J. Rishikesh
Counsel for Respondent/ Revenue: Dr. B. Ramaswamy
Case Title: The Ramco Cements Limited vs ITO
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 108
Case Number: WP No 33756/2023
Click here to read/ download the Order
