Entire Income Tax Assessment Must Conclude within 30 Months where TPO Reference Exists: ITAT [Read Order]
ITAT decides on limitation issue with terms referring to similar case in SC. The tribunal observed that sections 144C and 153 are mutually inclusive.
![Entire Income Tax Assessment Must Conclude within 30 Months where TPO Reference Exists: ITAT [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2026/02/04/2123752-entire-income-tax-assessment-must-conclude-within-30-months-taxscan.webp "Entire Income Tax Assessment Must Conclude within 30 Months where TPO Reference Exists: ITAT [Read Order]")
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, has held that in cases where the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) reference exists, the entire income tax assessment as per Sections 144 and 153 must conclude within 30 months. It had been argued by the assessee, Rohde and Schwarz India Private Limited, that the order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) is time...
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, has held that in cases where the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) reference exists, the entire income tax assessment as per Sections 144 and 153 must conclude within 30 months.
It had been argued by the assessee, Rohde and Schwarz India Private Limited, that the order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) is time barred by limitation as it has passed the time frame prescribed under Section 153. The counsel for the Revenue Department submitted that the issue of limitation and the interplay between Section 153 and 144C is unsettled by law and pending adjudication.
Also Read:Supreme Court Upholds Gujarat HC Order Quashing Income Tax Reassessment Against Adani Wilmar, Dismisses Revenue’s SLP
The ITAT considered various cases with identical instances including Teva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Industries India Private Limited v. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department and decided to reject the objection and request for deferring hearing as had been done in the mentioned case. Reliance has also been taken from the ratio of the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Roca Bathroom Products (P) Lt from the Madras High Court.
It observed that both Section 144C and 153 are mutually inclusive and interdependent, using the position in the Roca Bathroom case. Due to the notwithstanding clause in S.144C(13), operation of S.153 cannot be excluded. The rule of construction, “ex visceribusactus”, helps in avoiding inconsistency either within a section or between two different sections or provisions of the same statute.
Also Read:Wrongful Disclosure of Taxpayer Data by Public Servants: Finance Bill Eases Penal Provision u/s 280
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
