ITAT Delhi quashes AECOM India assessments as time-barred under Section 144C read with Section 153

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has quashed the final assessment orders passed against AECOM India Pvt. Ltd. for Assessment Years 2010–11 and 2011–12, holding that they were barred by limitation under Section 144C(13) read with Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Background

The assessee challenged the validity of the final assessment orders on the ground that they were time-barred, raising the issue through additional grounds of appeal. The dispute centred on the interplay between Section 144C (Dispute Resolution Panel mechanism) and Section 153 (time limits for completion of assessment).The Revenue objected to the Tribunal adjudicating the matter, arguing that the issue was pending before the Supreme Court following a split verdict in Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. and that judgments such as Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd. should not be relied upon. It was contended that Section 144C constituted a self-contained code, independent of Section 153.

Tribunal’s ruling

Rejecting the Revenue’s objections, the Tribunal followed the ratio laid down by the Madras High Court in Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd., holding that Sections 144C and 153 are mutually inclusive and inter-dependent, not mutually exclusive. It reiterated that the Dispute Resolution Panel proceedings are a continuation of assessment proceedings, and statutory timelines cannot be bypassed.

On facts, the Tribunal noted that:

1. For AY 2010–11, the final assessment order ought to have been passed by 31 March 2014, but was actually passed on 23 January 2015.
2. For AY 2011–12, the due date was 31 March 2015, whereas the order was passed on 22 December 2015.

Since both orders were issued beyond the permissible limitation period, they were held to be invalid and were quashed in entirety. The Tribunal clarified that other grounds were left open and may be revived depending on the outcome of proceedings before the Supreme Court.

The ruling reinforces the principle that statutory timelines under the Income Tax Act are mandatory, even in cases routed through the DRP mechanism.