Facts of the Case
The petitioner, BT Global Communications India Pvt. Ltd.,
challenged an order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer
assessing its total income at ₹5,47,92,27,510 for Assessment Year
2016-17.
The petitioner contended that the impugned order was a draft
assessment order under Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and since
the petitioner was not an “eligible assessee”, no such draft order could
have been issued. The challenge was founded primarily on the heading of the
order, which described it as “Draft Order u/s 144C of the Income-tax Act,
1961”, and on the Document Identification Number (DIN) referencing
Section 144C.
The Revenue disputed this characterization and asserted that
the order was in substance and in law a final assessment order passed under
Section 143(3) of the Act.
Issues Involved
Whether the impugned assessment order was a draft assessment
order under Section 144C or a final assessment order under Section 143(3) of
the Income Tax Act, 1961, and whether an incorrect heading or DIN reference
could alter the true nature of the order.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioner argued that:
- The
heading of the order expressly stated that it was a draft order under
Section 144C.
- The
DIN contained a reference to Section 144C, reinforcing the conclusion that
the order was issued under that provision.
- Since
the petitioner was an Indian company and no transfer pricing adjustment
was involved, the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to issue a draft
assessment order under Section 144C.
Respondent’s Arguments
The Revenue contended that:
- The
impugned order was clearly an assessment order passed under Section
143(3), as reflected in the opening sheet, computation of income,
additions made, and initiation of penalty proceedings.
- The
reference to Section 144C in the heading and DIN was a systemic or
clerical error, which could not determine the true character of the
order.
- Substance
and contents of the order, not its label or DIN number, are determinative.
Court Order / Findings
The Delhi High Court examined the impugned order in detail and
held that:
- The opening
sheet of the order unequivocally stated that the assessment was made
under Section 143(3).
- The
order contained final conclusions, detailed reasons for
disallowances, computation of total income, and initiation of penalty
proceedings under Section 270A, all of which are inconsistent with
a draft assessment order under Section 144C.
- The
mere use of the words “Draft Order u/s 144C” in the heading or
reference to Section 144C in the DIN does not determine the statutory
character of the order.
- The
Assessing Officer had subsequently clarified that the reference to Section
144C was due to an inadvertent systemic error.
- An
order number or DIN is not dispositive of the provision under which
an order is passed; the substance of the order prevails over form.
The Court held that the petitioner’s challenge was founded on
an incorrect assumption and was therefore unsustainable.
Important Clarification
The Court clarified that clerical or systemic errors in
headings, DIN references, or portal reflections cannot override the clear and
unambiguous contents of an assessment order. Where the language and substance
of the order demonstrate that it is a final assessment under Section 143(3), it
cannot be treated as a draft order under Section 144C.
Final Outcome
The writ petition was dismissed with costs. The Delhi
High Court upheld the validity of the assessment order dated 06.12.2019,
holding that it was a valid assessment order passed under Section 143(3)
of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Costs of ₹1,00,000 were imposed on the
petitioner, to be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee
within four weeks.
link to download the order- https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1770112907_BTGLOBLECOMMUNICATIONSINIDAPVT.LTD.VsDEPUTYCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment