Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7 v. Sumitomo Corporation India (P) Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 28 August 2024 Judgment pronounced on: 02 September 2024 Judgment pronounced on: 02 September 2024 + ITA 52/2023 & CM APPL. 3673/2023 Judgment reserved on: 28 August 2024 Judgment pronounced on: 02 September 2024 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aseem Chawla, SSC with Ms. Pratishtha Chaudhary, Advocate. Through: Mr. Aseem Chawla, SSC with Ms. Pratishtha Chaudhary, Advocate. versus SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA (P) LTD......Respondent Through: Mr. Himanshu S. Sinha, Mr. Prashant Meharchandani & Mr. Jainender Singh Kataria, Advs Through: Mr. Himanshu S. Sinha, Mr. Prashant Meharchandani & Mr. Jainender Singh Kataria, Advs + filing) filing) ITA 451/2024 & CM APPL. 47709/2024 (10 days delay in PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC with Mr. Anant Mann, Mr. Pratyaksh, JSCs versus WICKWOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. Adv with Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni & Mr. Himanshu Aggarwal, Advs. Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni & Mr. Himanshu Aggarwal, Advs. + W.P.(C) 688/2019 MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao & Mr. Parth, Advocates versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr.Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Page 1 of 74 Pareek, JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 1009/2019 MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocates Advocates versus DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs for IT Deptt. Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 991/2019 MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, AdvocatesAdvocates versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 995/2019 MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocates. Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 993/2019 MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Signature Not Verified Through: versus Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocates DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC with Ms. Dacchita Shahi, Ms. Anuja Pethia, JSCs, Mr. Nring Chamwibo Zeliang, Ms. Anu Priya Nisha Minz, Advs. + W.P.(C) 12462/2021 JCB INDIA LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv with Mr. Aditya Vohra & Mr. Shashwat Dhamija, Advs. versus NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI &ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha, Advs + W.P.(C) 12844/2021 SMART CUBE INDIA PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv with Mr. Aditya Vohra, Mr.Neeraj Jain, Mr. Shashwat, Advs. versus JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .....Respondent Through: Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC with Ms. Dacchita Shahi, Ms. Anuja Pethia, JSCs, Mr. Nring Chamwibo Zeliang, Ms.Anu Priya Nisha Minz, Advs. + W.P.(C) 3444/2021 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 M/S MICROSOFT INDIA R AND D PVT. LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocates versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha, Advs + W.P.(C) 12844/2021 SMART CUBE INDIA PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv with Mr. Aditya Vohra, Mr.Neeraj Jain, Mr. Shashwat, Advs. versus JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .....Respondent Through: Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC with Ms. Dacchita Shahi, Ms. Anuja Pethia, JSCs, Mr. Nring Chamwibo Zeliang, Ms.Anu Priya Nisha Minz, Advs. + W.P.(C) 3444/2021 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 M/S MICROSOFT INDIA R AND D PVT. LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocates versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 3377/2021 MICROSOFT INDIA R AND D PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocates. versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC with Ms. Dacchita Shahi, Ms. Anuja Pethia, JSCs, Mr. Nring Chamwibo Zeliang, Ms. Anu Priya Nisha Minz, Advs. + W.P.(C) 3389/2021 M/S MICROSOFT INDIA (R AND D) PVT. LTD......Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocates versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC with Ms. Dacchita Shahi, Ms. Anuja Pethia, JSCs, Mr. Nring Chamwibo Zeliang, Ms. Anu Priya Nisha Minz, Advs. Signature Not Verified + + + W.P.(C) 3472/2021 MICROSOFT INDIA (R AND D) PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocatesversus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC with Ms. Dacchita Shahi, Ms. Anuja Pethia, JSCs, Mr. Nring Chamwibo Zeliang, Ms. Anu Priya Nisha Minz, Advs. W.P.(C) 3539/2021 M/S MICROSOFT INDIA R AND D PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nageswar Rao, Mr. Parth, Advocates. versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC with Ms. Dacchita Shahi, Ms. Anuja Pethia, JSCs, Mr. Nring Chamwibo Zeliang, Ms. Anu Priya Nisha Minz, Advs. W.P.(C) 11896/2021 TELSTRA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Manuj Sabharwal, Mr. Drona Negi & Mr. Ayush Kumar, Advs versus NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Agarwal, SSC with Mr. Shivansh B.Pandya, Mr. Viplav Acharya, JSCs & Mr. Utkarsh Tiwari, Advocate. + W.P.(C) 11949/2021 CONTATA SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, Mr. Kshitiz Garg & Mr. Sourav Verma, Advs. versus NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC, Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs, Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advocates. + W.P.(C) 12204/2021 & CM APPL. 38228/2021 (Stay) SWAROVSKI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Himanshu S. Sinha, Mr. Prashant Meharchandani & Mr. Jainender Singh Kataria, Advs versus JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OSD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha, Advs. + W.P.(C) 12319/2021 AXALTA COATING SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. Tarun Chawla, Mr. Sumit Lal Chandani & Mr. Utkarsa Kr. Gupta, Advocates. Versus Signature Not Verified NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, -EARLIER KNOWN AS NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, SC with Ms. Easha, Adv. + W.P.(C) 4043/2022 & CM APPL. 12064/2022 (stay) RAMTECH CONSULTING .....Petitioner Through: versus JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OSD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha, Advs. + W.P.(C) 12319/2021 AXALTA COATING SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. Tarun Chawla, Mr. Sumit Lal Chandani & Mr. Utkarsa Kr. Gupta, Advocates. Versus Signature Not Verified NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, -EARLIER KNOWN AS NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, SC with Ms. Easha, Adv. + W.P.(C) 4043/2022 & CM APPL. 12064/2022 (stay) RAMTECH CONSULTING .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. Tarun Chawla, Mr. Sumit Lal Chandani & Mr. Utkarsa Kr. Gupta, Advocates. versus NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha, Advs. + W.P.(C) 5913/2022 & CM APPL. 17722/2022 (stay) SOFTWAREONE INDIA PVT. LTD .....Petitioner Through: versus Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv with with Mr. Aditya Vohra & Mr. Shashwat Dhamija, Advocates. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha, Advs. + W.P.(C) 6365/2022 & CM APPL. 19227/2022 (stay) SMART CUBE INDIA PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. Tarun Chawla, Mr. Sumit Lal Chandani & Mr. Utkarsa Kr. Gupta, Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 22(2) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Ms. Easha, Advs. + W.P.(C) 6786/2022 & CM APPL. 20625/2022 (exemption) ADITYA TALWAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. Tarun Chawla, Mr. Sumit Lal Chandani & Mr. Utkarsa Kr. Gupta, Advocates versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 12735/2022 & CM APPL. 38706/2022 (stay) SWAROVSKI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Himanshu S. Sinha, Mr. Prashant Meharchandani & Mr. Jainender Singh Kataria, Advs versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 22-2 .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek,JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 12784/2022 & CM APPL. 38902/2022 (stay) SWAROVSKI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Himanshu S. Sinha, Mr. Prashant Meharchandani & Mr. Jainender Singh Kataria, Advs Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 22.2 .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek,JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 12785/2022 & CM APPL. 38904/2022 (stay) SWAROVSKI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Himanshu S. Sinha, Mr. Prashant Meharchandani & Mr. Jainender Singh Kataria, Advs versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 22.2 .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek,JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 7547/2023 AT KEARNEY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ishita Farsaiya, Mr. Sparsh Bhargava, Ms. Vanshika Taneja & Mr. Apurv Shukla, Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC, Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs, Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advocates. + W.P.(C) 14314/2023 & CM APPL. 56688/2023 (stay) KARL STORZ ENDOSCOPY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vishal Kalra & Mr. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 22.2 .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh & Mr. Yojit Pareek,JSCs for IT Deptt. + W.P.(C) 7547/2023 AT KEARNEY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ishita Farsaiya, Mr. Sparsh Bhargava, Ms. Vanshika Taneja & Mr. Apurv Shukla, Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC, Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs, Mr. Anmol Jagga, Advocates. + W.P.(C) 14314/2023 & CM APPL. 56688/2023 (stay) KARL STORZ ENDOSCOPY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vishal Kalra & Mr. Saumyendra S. Tomar, Mr. Ankit Sahni & Ms. Snigdha Gautam, Advocates. Versus NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Appearance not given. + ITA 454/2024 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC with Mr. Anant Mann, Mr. Pratyaksh Gupta, JSCs versus WICKWOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. Adv with Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni & Mr. Himanshu Aggarwal, Advs. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA J U D G M E N T YASHWANT VARMA, J. 1.This batch of writ petitions impugn the action of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer[1] who had proceeded to frame a final order of assessment pursuant to directions of remand framed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal[2] and thus having acted in breach of the procedure prescribed by Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961[3]. 2.Pursuant to the directions issued by the Court, Mr. Rao, learned 1 AO 2 Tribunal 3 Act Signature Not Verified counsel who has led submissions on behalf of the writ petitioners, has placed on the record a chart which succinctly encapsulates the principal facts obtaining in each of the writ petitions. That collaborative chart has principally bifurcated matters into Categories A and B and is extracted hereinbelow:- “CATEGORY A Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Page 16 of 74 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Date of Final Assessment Order in remand proceedings (Beyond Limitation) 29.09.2021 MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PRIVATE LIMIITED Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Date of Final Assessment Order in remand proceedings (Beyond Limitation) 29.09.2021 MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PRIVATE LIMIITED Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Digitally SignedBy:KAMLESH KUMARSigning Date:02.09.202417:04:21 their counteraffidavit. MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PRIVATE LIMIITED 3.While Category A comprises of matters where the solitary question which is raised is whether the AO was justified in proceeding to frame a final order of assessment and thus short circuiting the requirement of a draft assessment order being drawn in accordance with the requirement of Section 144C(1), the cases placed in Category B raise an additional challenge to the final orders of assessment with it being contended that the same came to be framed after the time prescribed under Section 153 of the Act had expired and thus being liable to be quashed on that ground additionally. Signature Not Verified 4.Although the facts have been duly captured in the chart which has been submitted by and on behalf of the writ petitioners jointly, we deem it appropriate to notice the following skeletal facts as they obtain in W.P.(C) 688/2019 (the principal writ petition on which arguments were addressed by learned counsels appearing for the writ petitioners) and W.P.(C) 11896/2021 (which was referred to by learned counsels representing the respondents). 5.Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd., the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) 688/2019, is stated to have filed its Return of Income pertaining to Assessment Year[4]2008-09 on 30 September 2008. The said return is stated to have been selected for scrutiny assessment and pursuant to which the AO made a reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer[5]in terms contemplated under Section 92CA of the Act. 6.On 27 October 2011, the TPO passed an order recommending an upward adjustment to the total income of the petitioner. Pursuant to the aforesaid, a draft assessment order came to be framed on 27 December 2011. Assailing the proposed additions, the petitioner filed objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel[6] in terms envisaged under Section 144C(2) of the Act. The aforenoted objections did not find favour with the DRP which and in terms of its directions dated 28 September 2012 affirmed the additions which were proposed in the draft assessment order. Pursuant to those directions, a final assessment order came to be framed on 19 November 2012. 7.Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the petitioner approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal in terms of its order dated 28 June 2016 allowed 4 AY 5 TPO 6 DRP Signature Not Verified the appeal and framed the following operative directions: - 7.Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the petitioner approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal in terms of its order dated 28 June 2016 allowed 4 AY 5 TPO 6 DRP Signature Not Verified the appeal and framed the following operative directions: - ―19. However, in the present case, it is an admitted fact that the said Circular was not in existence when the TPO passed the impugned orders for the respective assessment years i.e. assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10, under consideration. However, he admitted while passing the orders u/s 92CA of the Act for the assessment year 2010-11 that TNMM is most appropriate method for determining the Ann's Length Price. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to set aside this issue relating to the assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10 to the file of the TPO/ AO to decide as to what is the most appropriate method by considering the facts and the guidelines available in the form of circular. As regards to the issue relating to the comparables for which the information u/s 133(6) of the Act were obtained by the TPO and which were not confronted to the assessee, we are of the view that this issue also deserves to be set aside to the file of the TPO/ AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the present case, it was also the common contention of both the parties that the corporate issues if involved in any of the aforesaid assessment years those should also be decided by the TPO/ AO along with the issues relating to the application of most appropriate method and the selection of the co1nparables and the additional ground relating to deduction u/s 10A of the Act. We order accordingly. 20. As regards to the assessment year 2010-11 is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee admitted that there is no dispute relating to the application of most appropriate method. However, the additional ground relating to deduction u/s 1 0A of the Act was not before the TPO/ AO. The said grounds are purely legal grounds and raised first ti1ne before the Tribunal, so this issue raised in the additional grounds is remanded to the file of the TPO/ AO to be decided along with another assessment years under consideration. Since the issue relating to the deduction u/s 10A of the Act is restored to the file of the TPO/ AO, the another issues relating to corporate matters should also be decided by the TPO/ AO afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 21. As regards to the issues raised on the transfer pricing all matters in the grounds of appeal relating to assessment year 2010-11, the contentions of both the parties were sin1ilar as were 1n respect of the si1nilar grounds in another appeals relating to the other assess1nent years 2007-08 to 2009-10 which we have already adjudicated in former part of this order. Therefore, our findings given therein shall apply with the same force for this assessment year i.e. 2010-11 also.‖ 8.Pursuant to the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the TPO is stated to have issued a notice in the second round of proceedings which ensued on 09 November 2016. On 31 October 2018, the TPO passed its final order referable to Section 92CA computing the total upward adjustment of income atINR 106,07,00,458/-. Although the AO is thereafter stated to have issued a notice on 20 November 2018 under Section 142(1) of the Act, it proceeded to frame a final order on 28 December 2018. The writ petition was entertained by us on 22 January 2019 and an interim order passed restraining the respondents from enforcing the consequential demand. 8.Pursuant to the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the TPO is stated to have issued a notice in the second round of proceedings which ensued on 09 November 2016. On 31 October 2018, the TPO passed its final order referable to Section 92CA computing the total upward adjustment of income atINR 106,07,00,458/-. Although the AO is thereafter stated to have issued a notice on 20 November 2018 under Section 142(1) of the Act, it proceeded to frame a final order on 28 December 2018. The writ petition was entertained by us on 22 January 2019 and an interim order passed restraining the respondents from enforcing the consequential demand. 9.Telstra India Private Limited[7]is the writ petitioner in the second matter which had been selected by us for the purposes of chronicling the facts as they obtained. Its challenge pertains to AY 2018-19 and in connection with which it submitted its Return of Income on 30 November 2018. During the course of examination of that return, a notice referable to Section 143(2) came to be issued on 22 September 2019. This was followed by an intimation under Section 143(1) making aggregate disallowances of INR 113,88,283/-.This was assailed by Telstra before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[8] which ultimately allowed the challenge and deleted the disallowances. On 07 April and 28 July 2021, the petitioner was served with notices under Section 92CAintimating it of a reference having been made to the TPO. The TPO issued a show cause notice on 03 September 2021 apprising the writ petitioner of various adjustments which were proposed to be made. Since the additions proposed would have been binding on the AO in terms of Section 92CA(4), the 7 Telstra 8 CIT(A) Signature Not Verified petitioner chose not to make any further submissions. This led to a final order of assessment being passed on 18 September 2021. This was assailed by way of a writ petition before this Court. On 16 December 2021, interim orders came to be passed with it being provided that the assessment orders as well as consequential demand notices and penalty proceedings would remain stayed. 10.Since the arguments have revolved around Sections 144C and 153 of the Act, we deem it appropriate to extract those two provisions hereunder: - ―Reference to Dispute Resolution Panel. 144C. (1) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, in the first instance, forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment (hereafter in this section referred to as the draft order) to the eligible assessee if he proposes to make, on or after the 1st day of October, 2009, any variation [* * *] which is prejudicial to the interest of such assessee. (2) On receipt of the draft order, the eligible assessee shall, within —thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order, (a) file his acceptance of the variations to the Assessing Officer; or or (b) file his objections, if any, to such variation with, (i) the Dispute Resolution Panel; and (ii) the Assessing Officer. (3) The Assessing Officer shall complete the assessment on the basis —of the draft order, if (a) the assessee intimates to the Assessing Officer the acceptance of the variation; or of the variation; or (b) no objections are received within the period specified in subsection (2). subsection (2). (4) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything contained in section 153 [or section 153B], pass the assessment order under sub-section (3) within one month from the end of the month in —which, (a) the acceptance is received; or Signature Not Verified (b) the period of filing of objections under sub-section (2) expires. (5) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall, in a case where any objection is received under sub-section (2), issue such directions, as it thinks fit, for the guidance of the Assessing Officer to enable him to complete the assessment. (6) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall issue the directions referred —to in sub-section (5), after considering the following, namely: (a) draft order; (b) no objections are received within the period specified in subsection (2). subsection (2). (4) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything contained in section 153 [or section 153B], pass the assessment order under sub-section (3) within one month from the end of the month in —which, (a) the acceptance is received; or Signature Not Verified (b) the period of filing of objections under sub-section (2) expires. (5) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall, in a case where any objection is received under sub-section (2), issue such directions, as it thinks fit, for the guidance of the Assessing Officer to enable him to complete the assessment. (6) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall issue the directions referred —to in sub-section (5), after considering the following, namely: (a) draft order; (b) objections filed by the assessee; (c) evidence furnished by the assessee; (d) report, if any, of the Assessing Officer, Valuation Officer or Transfer Pricing Officer or any other authority; Transfer Pricing Officer or any other authority; (e) records relating to the draft order; (f) evidence collected by, or caused to be collected by, it; and (g) result of any enquiry made by, or caused to be made by, it. (7) The Dispute Resolution Panel may, before issuing any directions —referred to in sub-section (5), (a) make such further enquiry, as it thinks fit; or (b) cause any further enquiry to be made by any income tax authority and report the result of the same to it. (8) The Dispute Resolution Panel may confirm, reduce or enhance the variations proposed in the draft order so, however, that it shall not set aside any proposed variation or issue any direction under sub-section (5) for further enquiry and passing of the assessment order. [Explanation.— For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that the power of the Dispute Resolution Panel to enhance the variation shall include and shall be deemed always to have included the power to consider any matter arising out of the assessment proceedings relating to the draft order, notwithstanding that such matter was raised or not by the eligible assessee.] (9) If the members of the Dispute Resolution Panel differ in opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members. (10) Every direction issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel shall be binding on the Assessing Officer. (11) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued unless an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee and the Assessing Officer on such directions which are prejudicial to the interest of the Signature Not Verified assessee or the interest of the revenue, respectively. (12) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued after nine months from the end of the month in which the draft order is forwarded to the eligible assessee. (13) Upon receipt of the directions issued under sub-section (5), the Assessing Officer shall, in conformity with the directions, complete, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 153 or section 153-B], the assessment without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee, within one month from the end of the month in which such direction is received. (14) The Board may make rules for the purposes of the efficient functioning of the Dispute Resolution Panel and expeditious disposal of the objections filed under sub-section (2) by the eligible assessee. [(14A) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any assessment or reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner as provided in sub-section (12) of section 144BA.] [(14-B) The Central Government may make a scheme, by notification in the Official Gazette, for the purposes of issuance of directions by the dispute resolution panel, so as to impart greater —efficiency, transparency and accountability by (14) The Board may make rules for the purposes of the efficient functioning of the Dispute Resolution Panel and expeditious disposal of the objections filed under sub-section (2) by the eligible assessee. [(14A) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any assessment or reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner as provided in sub-section (12) of section 144BA.] [(14-B) The Central Government may make a scheme, by notification in the Official Gazette, for the purposes of issuance of directions by the dispute resolution panel, so as to impart greater —efficiency, transparency and accountability by (a) eliminating the interface between the dispute resolution panel and the eligible assessee or any other person to the extent technologically feasible; and the eligible assessee or any other person to the extent technologically feasible; (b) optimising utilisation of the resources through economies of scale and functional specialisation; scale and functional specialisation; (c) introducing a mechanism with dynamic jurisdiction for issuance of directions by dispute resolution panel. of directions by dispute resolution panel. (14C) The Central Government may, for the purpose of giving effect to the scheme made under sub-section (14B), by notification in the Official Gazette, direct that any of the provisions of this Act shall not apply or shall apply with such exceptions, modifications and adaptations as may be specified in the notification: Provided that no direction shall be issued after the 31st day of March, [2024] (14D) Every notification issued under sub-section (14B) and sub-section (14C) shall, as soon as may be after the notification is issued, be laid before each House of Parliament.] —(15) For the purposes of this section, (a) ―Dispute Resolution Panel‖ means a collegium comprising of three [Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners of Income-tax constituted by the Board for this purpose; three [Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners of Income-tax constituted by the Board for this purpose; Signature Not Verified (b) ―eligibleassessee‖ means,— (i) any person in whose case the variation referred to in sub-section (1) arises as a consequence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and section (1) arises as a consequence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and [(ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company.] company.] Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment and recomputation. 153. (1) No order of assessment shall be made under section 143 or section 144 at any time after the expiry of twenty-one months from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable: [Provided that in respect of an order of assessment relating to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 2018, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―eighteenmonths‖ had been substituted: [Provided further that in respect of an order of assessment relating —to the assessment year commencing on (i) the 1st day of April, 2019, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―twelvemonths‖ had been substituted; shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―twelvemonths‖ had been substituted; (ii) the 1st day of April, 2020, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―eighteenmonths‖ had been substituted:]] shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―eighteenmonths‖ had been substituted:]] [Provided further that in respect of an order of assessment relating —to the assessment year commencing on (i) the 1st day of April, 2019, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―twelvemonths‖ had been substituted; shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―twelvemonths‖ had been substituted; (ii) the 1st day of April, 2020, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―eighteenmonths‖ had been substituted:]] shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―eighteenmonths‖ had been substituted:]] [Provided also that in respect of an order of assessment relating to the assessment year commencing on [* * *] the 1st day of April, 2021, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words ―twenty-one months‖, the words ―ninemonths‖ had been substituted:] [Provided alsothat in respect of an order of assessment relating to the assessment year commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 2022, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words “twenty-one months”, the words “twelvemonths” had been substituted.] [(1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where a return under sub-section (8A) of section 139 is furnished, an order of assessment under section 143 or section 144 may be made at any time before the expiry of [twelve months] from the end of the financial year in which such return was furnished.] (2) No order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation shall be Signature Not Verified made under section 147 after the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the notice under section 148 was served: [Provided that where the notice under section 148 is served on or after the 1st day of April, 2019, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words ―ninemonths‖, the words ―twelvemonths‖ had been substituted.] (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1) [, (1A)] and (2), an order of fresh assessment [or fresh order under section 92CA, as the case may be,] in pursuance of an order under section 254 or section 263 or section 264, setting aside or cancelling an assessment, [or an order under section 92CA, as the case may be] may be made at any time before the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the order under section 254 is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, or, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section 264 is passed by the [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, as the case may be,]: [Provided that where the order under section 254 is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section 264 is passed by the [PrincipalChief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be,] on or after the 1st day of April, 2019, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if for the words ―ninemonths‖, the words ―twelvemonths‖ had been substituted.] [(3A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1), (1A), (2) and (3), where an assessment or reassessment is pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A, the period available for completion of assessment or reassessment, as the case may be, under the said —sub-sections shall, (a) in a case where such search is initiated under section 132 or such requisition is made under section 132A; such requisition is made under section 132A; (b) in the case of an assessee, to whom any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing seized or requisitioned belongs to; jewellery or other valuable article or thing seized or requisitioned belongs to; [(3A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1), (1A), (2) and (3), where an assessment or reassessment is pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A, the period available for completion of assessment or reassessment, as the case may be, under the said —sub-sections shall, (a) in a case where such search is initiated under section 132 or such requisition is made under section 132A; such requisition is made under section 132A; (b) in the case of an assessee, to whom any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing seized or requisitioned belongs to; jewellery or other valuable article or thing seized or requisitioned belongs to; (c) in the case of an assessee, to whom any books of account or documents seized or requisitioned pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, documents seized or requisitioned pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, be extended by twelve months.] (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in [sub-sections (1), (1A), (2), (3) and (3A)], where a reference under sub-section (1) of section 92CA is made during the course of the proceeding for the assessment or reassessment, the period available for completion of assessment or reassessment, as the case may be, under the said [sub-sections (1), (1-A), (2), (3) and (3A)] shall be extended by twelve months. (5) Where effect to an order under section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 is to be given by the Assessing Officer [or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment [or fresh order under section 92CA, as the case may be,] such effect shall be given within a period of three months from the end of the month in which order under section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section 264 is passed by [the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, as the case may be,]: Provided that where it is not possible for the Assessing Officer [or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] to give effect to such order within the aforesaid period, for reasons beyond his control, the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner on receipt of such request in writing from the Assessing Officer, [or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] if satisfied, may allow an additional period of six months to give effect to the order: [Provided further that where an order under section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 requires verification of any issue by way of submission of any document by the assessee or any other person or where an opportunity of being heard is to be provided to the assessee, the order giving effect to the said order under section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 shall be made within the time specified in sub-section (3).] [(5A) Where the Transfer Pricing Officer gives effect to an order or direction under section 263 by an order under section 92CA and forwards such order to the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer shall proceed to modify the order of assessment or reassessment or recomputation, in conformity with such order of the Transfer Pricing Officer, within two months from the end of the month in which such order of the Transfer Pricing Officer is received by him.] (6) Nothing contained in sub-sections (1) [, (1-A)] and (2) shall apply to the following classes of assessments, reassessments and recomputation which may, subject to the provisions of [sub-sections —(3), (5) and (5-A)], be completed (i) where the assessment, reassessment or recomputation is made Signature Not Verified [(5A) Where the Transfer Pricing Officer gives effect to an order or direction under section 263 by an order under section 92CA and forwards such order to the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer shall proceed to modify the order of assessment or reassessment or recomputation, in conformity with such order of the Transfer Pricing Officer, within two months from the end of the month in which such order of the Transfer Pricing Officer is received by him.] (6) Nothing contained in sub-sections (1) [, (1-A)] and (2) shall apply to the following classes of assessments, reassessments and recomputation which may, subject to the provisions of [sub-sections —(3), (5) and (5-A)], be completed (i) where the assessment, reassessment or recomputation is made Signature Not Verified on the assessee or any person in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in an order under section 250, section 254, section 260, section 262, section 263, or section 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding otherwise than by way of appeal or reference under this Act, on or before the expiry of twelve months from the end of the month in which such order is received or passed by the [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or] Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, as the case may be; or (ii) where, in the case of a firm, an assessment is made on a partner of the firm in consequence of an assessment made on the firm under section 147, on or before the expiry of twelve months from the end of the month in which the assessment order in the case of the firm is passed. of the firm in consequence of an assessment made on the firm under section 147, on or before the expiry of twelve months from the end of the month in which the assessment order in the case of the firm is passed. (7) Where effect to any order, finding or direction referred to in sub-section (5) or sub-section (6) is to be given by the Assessing Officer, within the time specified in the said sub-sections, and such order has been received or passed, as the case may be, by the income-tax authority specified therein before the 1st day of June, 2016, the Assessing Officer shall give effect to such order, finding or direction, or assess, reassess or recompute the income of the assessee, on or before the 31st day of March, 2017. (8) Notwithstanding anything contain