ACIT v. United Spirits Ltd. (2025) 178 taxmann.com 192 / 347 CTR 866 / 255 DTR 45 (Karn)(HC) Editorial : United Spirits Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (2024) 296 Taxman 141/ 464 ITR 167 / 337 CTR 826/ 236 DTR 47 (Karn)(HC) affirmed.

S. 153 : Assessment-Reassessment-Limitation-Tribunal, by order dated 31-3-2015, remanded matter to Assessing Officer for de novo consideration-Fresh assessment, as directed by Tribunal, ought to have been completed on or before 31-3-2017 as per sub-section (7) of section 153, as amended by the Finance Act, 2016-Notice dated 6-11-2020 issued by Assessing Officer was barred by limitation. [S. 153(6), 153(7), 254(1), Art. 226]

Assessing Officer completed assessment under section 143(3) on 31-12-2009-Tribunal, by order dated 31-3-2015, remanded matter to Assessing Officer for de novo consideration. Thereafter, Assessing Officer, by notice dated 6-11-2020, sought to provide an opportunity to assessee to complete assessment afresh in terms of Tribunal’s directions. Assessee challenged said notice in writ petition, inter alia contending that proceedings were time-barred.Single Judge held that, in view of section 153(7), notice dated 6-11-2020 was barred by limitation and accordingly quashed same.It was noted that sub-section (3) is expressly made subject to provisions of sub-section (2A) which governs cases where an order of fresh assessment is to be made in pursuance of an order of Tribunal setting aside or cancelling an assessment and it prescribes a period of limitation of one year from end of financial year in which order of Tribunal is received by Principal Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner, Principal Commissioner, or Commissioner, as case may be. Court held that  on a combined reading of sub-sections (7) and (9) of section 153, it is to be held that sub-section (7) of section 153, as amended by Finance Act, 2016, is applicable to instant case, and fresh assessment, as directed by Tribunal, ought to have been completed on or before 31-3-2017.  Notice issued by Assessing Officer on 6-11-2020 to complete assessment was barred by limitation. Order of single judge affirmed. (AY.2007-08)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*