Mondelez India Foods Private Limited vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Mumbai)

Court: ITAT Mumbai
Head Notes:

Computation of limitation period section 92CA(3A) and 153(1) of the Act. In calculating 60 days – the day on which limitation to pass assessment order expires has to be excluded

Under section 92CA(3A) and 153(1) of the Act the TPO is required to pass order u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act at any time before sixty days prior to the date on which the period of limitation referred to in section 153 of the Act for making assessment order expires.

As per section 92CA(3A) of the Act, where reference is made to the TPO, the TPO is required to pass order under section 92CA(3) of the Act at any time before sixty days prior to the date on which the period of limitation referred to in section 153 for making the assessment order expires. Under section 153 of the Act as applicable to the assessment year 2010-11, where reference is made to TPO under section 92CA(1) of the Act, the limitation for passing assessment order shall be three years from the end of assessment year in which the income was first assessable.

In the present case, the due date for completion of assessment in accordance with third proviso to section 153(1) of the Act was 31/03/2014. The time limit for passing the order under section 92CA(3A) of the Act is before sixty days prior to the date on which limitation for passing assessment order expires. In calculating 60 days – the day on which limitation to pass assessment order expires i.e. 31/03/2014 has to be excluded. Calculating 60 days backwards – 30 days of March, 28 days of February and 2 days of January. Thus, the last date for passing the order under section 92CA(3) of the Act was 29/01/2014. The TPO passed the order under section 92CA(3) of the Act on 30/01/2014. Thus, the order passed under section 92CA(3) of the Act is time barred by one day.

(i) Pfizer Healthcare India (P) Ltd. vs. JCIT,433 ITR 028 (Mad) and (ii) DCIT vs. Saint Gobain India (P) Ltd., 137 taxmann.com 215 (Mad) and (iii) Unisys India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No.2096/Bang/2017 followed

Law:
Section(s): section 92CA(3A), section 153(1)
Counsel(s): Appellant by : Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate with Shri Hiten Chande Shri Ajit Kumar Jain & Shri Siddhesh Chougule Respondent by Ms. Vatsala Jha ,CIT-DR
Dowload Pdf File Click here to download the file in pdf format
Uploaded By Aakansha
Date of upload: December 3, 2022

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

*