HomeDirect TaxSupreme Court Split on Whether DRP Route Can Extend Assessment Deadlines

Supreme Court Split on Whether DRP Route Can Extend Assessment Deadlines

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court has delivered a split verdict in the Shelf Drilling case concerning the interplay between Sections 144C and 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in determining the limitation period for completing assessments.

While the detailed order is awaited, the ruling is expected to have a far-reaching impact, particularly for assessees who opted for the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) route in earlier assessment years.

The central question before the Court was whether, in cases routed through the DRP under Section 144C, the final assessment order must still be completed within the overarching time limit prescribed under Section 153 — generally 12 months from the end of the financial year in which the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) remand order was received — or whether the additional time frames embedded in Section 144C for DRP proceedings and for the Assessing Officer’s final order function independently, thereby extending the permissible period.

Tax professionals and corporates are closely watching for the detailed reasoning, as the verdict could shape future assessment timelines and the validity of orders passed under extended schedules.

Read More: CBDT Amends Income-tax Rules to Include Foreign Portfolio Investors in IFSC Transactions

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty Demand on Poultry Cage Weld Mesh

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Commission Retained on Air Tickets Bought Through GSA/IATA Agents Not Taxable as Business Auxiliary Service

The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

CENVAT Credit Can’t Be Denied on Duty-Paid Inputs from Area-Based Exempt Units: CESTAT

The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Ignoring Taxpayer’s Reply While Rejecting GST Refund Is Illegal: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has set aside an ex-parte order rejecting a GST refund...

More like this

CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty Demand on Poultry Cage Weld Mesh

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Commission Retained on Air Tickets Bought Through GSA/IATA Agents Not Taxable as Business Auxiliary Service

The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

CENVAT Credit Can’t Be Denied on Duty-Paid Inputs from Area-Based Exempt Units: CESTAT

The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...