We received a draft order on 12 March. Nobody objected. When was the final order due, and if we had objected, by when must the Dispute Resolution Panel have issued its directions and by when must the officer have given effect to them?
Four clocks, and only one of them runs from a date. Section 144C(2) gives the eligible assessee thirty days "of the receipt by him of the draft order" to file acceptance with the Assessing Officer or objections with the Panel and the Assessing Officer — that one runs from the date of receipt. The other three run from the end of a month, and that is where the counting goes wrong. Section 144C(4): where the assessee accepts or files no objection, "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 (b) the period of filing of objections under sub-section (2) expires." Section 144C(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." Section 144C(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 153B, 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." Note the four different starting EVENTS. The thirty days in (2) start on RECEIPT by the assessee. The nine months in (12) start at the end of the month in which the draft order is FORWARDED — the officer's act of despatch, not the assessee's receipt, so the (2) clock and the (12) clock can start in different months on the same draft order. The one month in (4) starts at the end of the month in which the acceptance is received or the thirty-day period expires. The one month in (13) starts at the end of the month in which the DIRECTION is received by the officer. Both (4) and (13) run notwithstanding s.153 and s.153B.
Decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text) on 2009-10-01, reported as Section 144C(2), (4), (5), (12) and (13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, heading "Reference to dispute resolution panel", transcribed from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144c-16 (Year: 2025), and transcribed independently from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144c (Year: 2009), which prints the same four periods in identical terms. It bears on section 144C, section 144C(2), section 144C(4), section 144C(5), section 144C(12), section 144C(13), section 144C(1), section 144C(3), section 153, section 153B, section 153A, section 153C, section 92CA, section 92CA(3), section 253, section 253(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961, in Assessment & Scrutiny, Appeals and How Tax Law Is Read matters.
These are limitation provisions and an order passed outside them is not a late order but a bad one, which is why the library already holds Benteler Automotive on a time-barred s.144C(13) final order, CIT v Roca Bathroom Products on DRP limitation, Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer on the interaction of s.153 with s.144C, and a dedicated page on which clock runs, s.153 or s.144C. This entry supplies the text those pages argue about. The practical value is in three distinctions the wording forces. FIRST, "from the end of the month" is not "from the date". A direction received by the officer on 2 November gives him until 31 December, not until 2 December, because the month runs from 30 November; the drafting gives the officer the balance of the month plus a full month, and a practitioner who counts thirty days from the date will believe an order is time-barred when it is not, or will let a genuinely time-barred order go unchallenged. SECOND, the two one-month clocks in (4) and (13) look identical and start on different events — (4) on the end of the month of acceptance or of expiry of the objection period, (13) on the end of the month in which the Panel's direction is received. They belong to two different branches of the section and can never both be running. THIRD, the nine months in (12) start from the end of the month in which the draft order is FORWARDED, while the thirty days in (2) start from RECEIPT. On a draft order forwarded on 30 September and received on 3 October, the Panel's nine months are counted from 30 September and expire on 30 June, while the assessee's thirty days are counted from 3 October. Two clocks that a reader will assume start together do not.
Binding on the department, not on the assessee or the courts. An assessee may rely on a circular that is beneficial to them.
Read aloud by your device. Press again to stop.
As printed on the departmental page stamped Year 2025, the four periods read: "(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 (b) file his objections, if any, to such variation with,— (i) the Dispute Resolution Panel; and (ii) the Assessing Officer."; "(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 (b) the period of filing of objections under sub-section (2) expires."; "(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."; and "(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 153B, 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." Sub-section (5), which the nine-month period in (12) governs, reads: "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." The original edition stamped Year 2009 prints sub-sections (2) and (12) in exactly the same words, and prints sub-sections (4) and (13) in the same words save that each names section 153 alone and not "section 153 or section 153B".
Not a judgment. The statutory position is that an eligible assessee has thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order to file acceptance with the Assessing Officer or objections with both the Dispute Resolution Panel and the Assessing Officer; that where he accepts or files no objection the Assessing Officer must pass the assessment order under s.144C(3) within one month from the end of the month in which the acceptance is received or the period of filing objections expires, notwithstanding s.153 or s.153B; that no direction under s.144C(5) may be issued after nine months from the end of the month in which the draft order is forwarded to the eligible assessee; and that on receipt of directions the Assessing Officer must complete the assessment in conformity with them, without any further opportunity of being heard, within one month from the end of the month in which the direction is received, notwithstanding s.153 or s.153B. Three of the four periods run from the end of a month and not from a date, and the starting events differ — receipt by the assessee for s.144C(2), forwarding by the officer for s.144C(12), and receipt of the direction by the officer for s.144C(13).
Not a judgment; no judicial reasoning is stated for the section.
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.
Upload it and we will read it, work out your deadline and draft the reply. A CA reviews before anything is filed.
Handle my notice → Ask a CA on WhatsAppFour clocks, and only one of them runs from a date. Section 144C(2) gives the eligible assessee thirty days "of the receipt by him of the draft order" to file acceptance with the Assessing Officer or objections with the Panel and the Assessing Officer — that one runs from the date of receipt. The other three run from the end of a month, and that is where the counting goes wrong. Section 144C(4): where the assessee accepts or files no objection, "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 (b) the period of filing of objections under sub-section (2) expires." Section 144C(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." Section 144C(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 153B, 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." Note the four different starting EVENTS. The thirty days in (2) start on RECEIPT by the assessee. The nine months in (12) start at the end of the month in which the draft order is FORWARDED — the officer's act of despatch, not the assessee's receipt, so the (2) clock and the (12) clock can start in different months on the same draft order. The one month in (4) starts at the end of the month in which the acceptance is received or the thirty-day period expires. The one month in (13) starts at the end of the month in which the DIRECTION is received by the officer. Both (4) and (13) run notwithstanding s.153 and s.153B. This was decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text) and bears on section 144C, section 144C(2), section 144C(4), section 144C(5), section 144C(12), section 144C(13), section 144C(1), section 144C(3), section 153, section 153B, section 153A, section 153C, section 92CA, section 92CA(3), section 253, section 253(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961. It is reported as Section 144C(2), (4), (5), (12) and (13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, heading "Reference to dispute resolution panel", transcribed from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144c-16 (Year: 2025), and transcribed independently from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144c (Year: 2009), which prints the same four periods in identical terms. These are limitation provisions and an order passed outside them is not a late order but a bad one, which is why the library already holds Benteler Automotive on a time-barred s.144C(13) final order, CIT v Roca Bathroom Products on DRP limitation, Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer on the interaction of s.153 with s.144C, and a dedicated page on which clock runs, s.153 or s.144C. This entry supplies the text those pages argue about. The practical value is in three distinctions the wording forces. FIRST, "from the end of the month" is not "from the date". A direction received by the officer on 2 November gives him until 31 December, not until 2 December, because the month runs from 30 November; the drafting gives the officer the balance of the month plus a full month, and a practitioner who counts thirty days from the date will believe an order is time-barred when it is not, or will let a genuinely time-barred order go unchallenged. SECOND, the two one-month clocks in (4) and (13) look identical and start on different events — (4) on the end of the month of acceptance or of expiry of the objection period, (13) on the end of the month in which the Panel's direction is received. They belong to two different branches of the section and can never both be running. THIRD, the nine months in (12) start from the end of the month in which the draft order is FORWARDED, while the thirty days in (2) start from RECEIPT. On a draft order forwarded on 30 September and received on 3 October, the Panel's nine months are counted from 30 September and expire on 30 June, while the assessee's thirty days are counted from 3 October. Two clocks that a reader will assume start together do not. If it applies to you, the first step is this: Record two separate dates on the file for every draft order — the date it was forwarded and the date it was received. Section 144C(12) runs from the first and s.144C(2) from the second.
As printed on the departmental page stamped Year 2025, the four periods read: "(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 (b) file his objections, if any, to such variation with,— (i) the Dispute Resolution Panel; and (ii) the Assessing Officer."; "(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 (b) the period of filing of objections under sub-section (2) expires."; "(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."; and "(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 153B, 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." Sub-section (5), which the nine-month period in (12) governs, reads: "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." The original edition stamped Year 2009 prints sub-sections (2) and (12) in exactly the same words, and prints sub-sections (4) and (13) in the same words save that each names section 153 alone and not "section 153 or section 153B". The matter was decided on 2009-10-01 by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text). On those facts the CBDT Circulars & Instructions held as follows. Not a judgment. The statutory position is that an eligible assessee has thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order to file acceptance with the Assessing Officer or objections with both the Dispute Resolution Panel and the Assessing Officer; that where he accepts or files no objection the Assessing Officer must pass the assessment order under s.144C(3) within one month from the end of the month in which the acceptance is received or the period of filing objections expires, notwithstanding s.153 or s.153B; that no direction under s.144C(5) may be issued after nine months from the end of the month in which the draft order is forwarded to the eligible assessee; and that on receipt of directions the Assessing Officer must complete the assessment in conformity with them, without any further opportunity of being heard, within one month from the end of the month in which the direction is received, notwithstanding s.153 or s.153B. Three of the four periods run from the end of a month and not from a date, and the starting events differ — receipt by the assessee for s.144C(2), forwarding by the officer for s.144C(12), and receipt of the direction by the officer for s.144C(13).
Not a judgment; no judicial reasoning is stated for the section. In the words reproduced by the source cited on this page: "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."
It was decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions on 2009-10-01 and is reported as Section 144C(2), (4), (5), (12) and (13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, heading "Reference to dispute resolution panel", transcribed from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144c-16 (Year: 2025), and transcribed independently from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144c (Year: 2009), which prints the same four periods in identical terms. Binding on the department, not on the assessee or the courts. An assessee may rely on a circular that is beneficial to them. A CBDT circular or instruction binds officers of the department but not the assessee and not the courts. Where a circular helps you, you may hold the department to it. Where it hurts you, it cannot override the Act or a judgment. On section 144C, section 144C(2), section 144C(4), section 144C(5), section 144C(12), section 144C(13), section 144C(1), section 144C(3), section 153, section 153B, section 153A, section 153C, section 92CA, section 92CA(3), section 253, section 253(1), the practical question is whether the facts of your own notice match the facts of this case closely enough for the same rule to apply.
It cuts both ways and is cited by both sides. Not a judgment. The statutory position is that an eligible assessee has thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order to file acceptance with the Assessing Officer or objections with both the Dispute Resolution Panel and the Assessing Officer; that where he accepts or files no objection the Assessing Officer must pass the assessment order under s.144C(3) within one month from the end of the month in which the acceptance is received or the period of filing objections expires, notwithstanding s.153 or s.153B; that no direction under s.144C(5) may be issued after nine months from the end of the month in which the draft order is forwarded to the eligible assessee; and that on receipt of directions the Assessing Officer must complete the assessment in conformity with them, without any further opportunity of being heard, within one month from the end of the month in which the direction is received, notwithstanding s.153 or s.153B. Three of the four periods run from the end of a month and not from a date, and the starting events differ — receipt by the assessee for s.144C(2), forwarding by the officer for s.144C(12), and receipt of the direction by the officer for s.144C(13). It arises in Assessment & Scrutiny, Appeals and How Tax Law Is Read matters, on section 144C, section 144C(2), section 144C(4), section 144C(5), section 144C(12), section 144C(13), section 144C(1), section 144C(3), section 153, section 153B, section 153A, section 153C, section 92CA, section 92CA(3), section 253, section 253(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961, and was decided by Not applicable — statutory text. Before relying on it, read the source linked on this page and check whether it has since been distinguished, overruled or overtaken by an amendment to the Income Tax Act. In practice the steps that follow from it are these. Count the thirty days under s.144C(2) from the date of receipt by the assessee, and do not treat it as one month; it is thirty days on the words of the section. For s.144C(4), s.144C(12) and s.144C(13), go first to the end of the month in which the starting event fell and count the one month or nine months from there. Never count from the date of the event itself. Where no objection was filed, check the s.144C(4) order against one month from the end of the month in which the thirty-day period expired, and take the limitation point if it was passed later; the library holds Benteler Automotive and Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer on the consequence. Where directions were issued, obtain the date on which the Assessing Officer received them, not the date they were signed; s.144C(13) runs from the end of the month of receipt by the officer. Do not concede that s.153 or s.153B extends any of these periods. Sub-sections (4) and (13) both operate notwithstanding s.153 and s.153B, and the library holds CIT v Roca Bathroom Products and a dedicated page on which clock runs.
Still good law. The four periods as stated are current so far as I could establish. They are printed in identical terms on the earliest departmental edition I reached, stamped Year 2009, and on the latest, stamped Year 2025, and no footnote on any of the eight editions read this pass touches any of them. Year 2025 is the most recent edition I reached; I probed no suffix above /w/section-144c-16, so a later amendment cannot be excluded. The one difference between the Year 2009 and Year 2025 editions in these sub-sections — that (4) and (13) now operate notwithstanding s.153 OR s.153B and formerly named s.153 alone — is stated as a difference between editions because I could not source a footnote giving the amending Act or its date. I read no judgment on this pass and make no statement about how s.153 or s.153B interacts with these periods; the library holds that question under CIT v Roca Bathroom Products, Benteler Automotive, Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer and its page on which clock runs. No source could be cited for that finding. Checking whether an authority still stands matters as much as knowing what it held: a decision may be overruled on one point and survive on another, or the provision it interprets may have been amended since. Read the source and the editor's note on this page before relying on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal.
Eight departmental editions of s.144C were opened and their "Year:" stamps recorded: /w/section-144c (Year: 2009), /w/section-144c-5 (Year: 2014), /w/section-144c-10 (Year: 2019 (No. 2)), /w/section-144c-11 (Year: 2021), /w/section-144c-12 (Year: 2022), /w/section-144c-13 (Year: 2023), /w/section-144c-14 (Year: 2024 (No. 1)) and /w/section-144c-16 (Year: 2025). All carry the heading "Reference to dispute resolution panel". Year 2025 is the most recent edition reached and the text in this entry is taken from it. The URL suffix is not a version number: /w/section-144c-10 carries a LATER year stamp than /w/section-144c-5 but /w/section-253-46 carries Year 1974 while /w/section-253-63 carries Year 2024 (No. 2), so no ordering can be read off the suffix. STALE-PAGE WARNING, found this pass. /w/section-144c (Year: 2009) and /w/section-144c-10 (Year: 2019 (No. 2)) both print s.144C(1) with the words "any variation IN THE INCOME OR LOSS RETURNED which is prejudicial to the interest of such assessee", and both print s.144C(15)(b)(ii) as "any foreign company". Both readings are out of date. Footnote 95 on /w/section-144c-11 (Year: 2021) reads verbatim "Words \"in the income or loss returned\" Omtt. by the Act No. 12 of 2020, w.e.f. 1-4-2020." and footnote 97 on the same page reads verbatim "Sub. by the Act No. 12 of 2020, w.e.f. 1-4-2020." against sub-clause (ii). The Year 2025 edition prints (1) without those words and (15)(b)(ii) as "any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company". /w/section-144c-10 is the second hit the departmental search returns for this section and it is a trap: a reader who takes the definition off it will conclude that a non-resident individual or firm is not an eligible assessee, which has been wrong since 1 April 2020. /w/section-144c (Year: 2009) also prints s.144C(8) with NO Explanation and s.144C(15)(a) as "three Commissioners of Income-tax" rather than "three Principal Commissioners or Commissioners of Income-tax". FOOTNOTE INVENTORY, transcribed verbatim from the editions named. /w/section-144c (Year: 2009), one footnote: "15a. Inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.r.e.f. 1-4-2009." /w/section-144c-5 (Year: 2014), footnote against the Explanation to sub-section (8): "76. Inserted by the Finance Act, 2012, w.r.e.f. 1-4-2009." /w/section-144c-10 (Year: 2019 (No. 2)): the "Footnotes" heading is printed but the list under it is EMPTY. /w/section-144c-11 (Year: 2021), three footnotes: "95. Words \"in the income or loss returned\" Omtt. by the Act No. 12 of 2020, w.e.f. 1-4-2020."; "96. Sub-sections (14B) to (14D) Ins. by the Act. No. 38 of 2020, w.e.f. 1-11-2020."; "97. Sub. by the Act No. 12 of 2020, w.e.f. 1-4-2020." /w/section-144c-12 (Year: 2022), one footnote: "91. Sub. by the Act No. 12 of 2020, w.e.f. 1-4-2020." /w/section-144c-13 (Year: 2023), one footnote: "12. Substituted for \"2022\" by the Finance Act, 2022, w.e.f. 1-4-2022." /w/section-144c-14 (Year: 2024 (No. 1)), one footnote: "12. Substituted for \"2024\" by the Finance Act, 2024, w.e.f. 1-4-2024. Earlier \"2024\" was substituted for \"2022\" by the Finance Act, 2022, w.e.f. 1-4-2022." /w/section-144c-16 (Year: 2025), two footnotes: "1. Omtt. by Act 2025, w.e.f. 1-4-2025. Prior to its omission, the proviso, as amended by Act No. 6 of 2022, w.e.f. 1-4-2022 and Act No. 8 of 2024, w.e.f. 1-4-2024, read as under: \"Provided that no direction shall be issued after the 31st day of March, 2025.\""; and "2. Ins. by Act No. 15 of 2024, w.e.f. 1-9-2024." I have NOT verified the short title of any of Act No. 12 of 2020, Act No. 38 of 2020, Act No. 6 of 2022, Act No. 8 of 2024, Act No. 15 of 2024, Act No. 25 of 2014, Act No. 20 of 2015 or Act No. 28 of 2016 against a government source; the Act numbers are what the departmental pages print and are what this library states. Footnote 1 on the Year 2025 page names the omitting Act only as "Act 2025", which is how it is printed. DEAD URLS IN THE DEPARTMENTAL SEARCH INDEX. Three .htm addresses were returned by WebSearch on incometaxindia.gov.in and every one of them returned HTTP 404 on WebFetch: /Acts/Income-tax%20Act,%201961/2013/102120000000027075.htm (indexed as "Reference to dispute resolution panel."), /Acts/Income-tax%20Act,%201961/2021/102120000000077655.htm and /Acts/Income-tax%20Act,%201961/2019/102120000000073641.htm (both indexed as "Appeals to the Appellate Tribunal"). The content of those three pages is not available to me and nothing in this entry rests on them. WHAT THE EDITIONS SHOW ABOUT THESE FOUR PERIODS. The thirty days in s.144C(2), the one month in s.144C(4), the nine months in s.144C(12) and the one month in s.144C(13) are printed in identical terms on the ORIGINAL edition stamped Year 2009 and on the current edition stamped Year 2025, and no departmental footnote on any edition I reached touches any of the four periods. The only difference between the two editions in these sub-sections is that the Year 2009 edition prints (4) and (13) as operating notwithstanding section 153 alone, while the Year 2025 edition prints both as operating notwithstanding section 153 OR SECTION 153B. I could NOT source the amending Act or the date on which section 153B was added to sub-sections (4) and (13): no departmental edition I reached carries a footnote against that change, and I state the fact of the difference between the two editions rather than an amending Act I have not read. NOTHING IN THIS ENTRY STATES AN EXTENSION, A RELAXATION OR AN EXCLUSION OF TIME. I did not read s.153, s.153B or any Taxation and Other Laws relaxation provision on this pass, and I make no statement about how any of them interacts with these four periods; that is the question the library already holds under CIT v Roca Bathroom Products, Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer and its page on which clock runs, and the reader should be sent there. The worked example for which this entry was written turned on the point that the s.144C(2) clock and the s.144C(12) clock start on different events — receipt by the assessee and forwarding by the officer — and that is on the face of the two sub-sections as printed on the Year 2025 edition. 'decided_on' is 2009-10-01, the date from which s.144C(1) operates on its own words and therefore the earliest date on which any of these periods could run; it is not a decision date, and 'bench' and 'favours' are inapplicable to a statutory entry. This library shows the verification state of every entry openly. This entry has not yet been read in full by a chartered accountant. The summary reflects the sources listed on this page. Read the source before you rely on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
Not a judgment. The statutory position is that an eligible assessee has thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order to file acceptance with the Assessing Officer or objections with both the Dispute Resolution Panel and the Assessing Officer; that where he accepts or files no objection the Assessing Officer must pass the assessment order under s.144C(3) within one month from the end of the month in which the acceptance is received or the period of filing objections expires, notwithstanding s.153 or s.153B; that no direction under s.144C(5) may be issued after nine months from the end of the month in which the draft order is forwarded to the eligible assessee; and that on receipt of directions the Assessing Officer must complete the assessment in conformity with them, without any further opportunity of being heard, within one month from the end of the month in which the direction is received, notwithstanding s.153 or s.153B. Three of the four periods run from the end of a month and not from a date, and the starting events differ — receipt by the assessee for s.144C(2), forwarding by the officer for s.144C(12), and receipt of the direction by the officer for s.144C(13).
TaxSphere, “Statutory position — s.144C(2), (4), (5), (12) and (13): the thirty days to object run from receipt, but the officer's one month and the Panel's nine months both run from the END OF THE MONTH, and the two one-month clocks start on different events”, https://taxnotice.vittsphere.com/caselaw/case/statutory-position-144c-the-clocks-thirty-days-one-month-and-nine-months-from-the-end-of-the-month/ (validity last checked 2026-09-17)
The judgment itself is a government work and may be quoted freely. The summary, the validity note and the reasoning on this page are this library's own writing: quote them with attribution, and please do not present either as the words of the court — this page keeps the two apart and so should a quotation of it.
Every entry in this library links to where it was found, so you can check it yourself rather than take our word for it.
The Assessing Officer has served a final assessment order on our foreign company raising a transfer pricing addition, without ever serving a draft order. Was he obliged to serve one first, and what was I supposed to do with it if he had?
We are considering objecting to a draft order. Can the Dispute Resolution Panel make our position worse, can it send the matter back for fresh enquiry, and if we lose before it, do we appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) or straight to the Tribunal?
The DRP issued its directions years ago and the Assessing Officer has still not passed a final assessment order. Is the assessment now dead, or can he pass one whenever he likes?
The officer took the TPO's adjustment straight into a final order without giving me a draft order. The department says s.292B cures it. Does it?
