The provisions of section 92CA(3A) of the Act prescribes the date for passing an order u/s 92CA(3) as “any time before 60 days prior to the date on which the period of limitation referred to in s. 153 expires”. According to the provisions of s. 153(1) r.w.s. 153(4), the time limit for passing of the order for under s. 153 was available up to 31.03.2015. Thus, the time limit for passing order u/s 92CA(3) was expiring on or before 29.01.2015. Held, (i) that the TPO for the AY 2011-12 had passed the order u/s 92CA(3) of the Act on 30.01.2015. For AY 2012-13 also, the limitation for passing an assessment order u/s 153 expired on 24 months from the end of the AY, i. e., on 31.01.2015. The extension of 12 months was granted as a reference was made u/s 92CA and therefore the limitation period was further extended from 31.3.2015 to 31.3.2016. The 60-day period after counting the one day in the month of January, 29 days of February being a leap year and 31 days of March 2016, expired on 31.1.2016. Therefore, the outer time limit for passing the order of the TPO was up to 30.1.2016. The order of the TPO was passed on 31.01.2016. For AY 2013-14,the TPO passed an order u/s 92CA(3) on 01.11.2016. Based on this the draft assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(1) was passed on 31.12.2016. The assessee filed objections before the DRP and directions were issued on 27.09.2017. Based on this the final assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed on 31.10.2017. According to  S. 153(1) the assessment order should have been passed within 21 months from the end of the AY in which the income was first assessable. Therefore, the time-limit for passing the assessment order expired on 31.12.2015. However, as there was a reference made to the TPO for passing an order under section 92CA a further period available for completion of the assessment was to be extended by 12 months. Thus, the time-limit for passing order under section 143(3) was available up to 31.12.2016. According to S. 92CA(3A) the TPO should have passed the order at any time before 60 days prior to the date on which the time-limit for making the order of the assessment expires. The time of 60 days was available till 31.10.2016. The order of the TPO was passed on 1.11.2016. Therefore, the orders passed by the TPO for all three years were beyond the time-limit and were not sustainable. Pfizer Healthcare India P. Ltd. v. JT. CIT [2021 433 ITR 28 (Mad) followed.

 (ii)That if the order passed by the TPO was beyond prescribed time-limit, the assessee would not remain an “eligible assessee” in terms of S. 144C(15)(b) of the Act and hence the extended time of 12 months was also not available. Therefore, even the regular assessment order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) read with S. 144C(13) of the Act dated 15.02.2016 also became barred by limitation and was not sustainable.(AY.2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14)