In the present case, the Court notices that the impugned notice was issued against a non-existent entity i.e. M/s. Rishi Promoters which had ceased to exist by virtue of order of this Court dated 20.02.20 13. The date of its amalgamation was in fact earlier. Apparently, the respondent-revenue was aware of this and despite that it proceeded to issue the impugned notice. The judgment in Spice Entertainment (supra) and Dimension Apparels (F) Limited (supra), though rendered after the final assessment was completed, are clear that such notice and proceedings emanating from it are unsustainable. Rustagi Engineering Udyog (F) Ltd. (supra) takes the logic further and holds that notice issued under section 147 of the Act in respect of an entity which ceases to exist by virtue of amalgamation order under section 394 of the Companies Act, would also be illegal and unsustainable.
Relevant Extract of the Judgment
2. The brief facts are that pursuant to search and seizure proceedings (which took place on 11.10.2006), a notice was issued under Section 153A/143(3) of the Act and the assessment was completed. This included inter alia assessment for pending AY 2007-08. Before the assessments could be completed, the petitioner approached the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC); after considering the submissions of charges, the application was admitted. Thereafter the ITSC called for a report under Rule 9A of the ITSC Rules, which was furnished to it by the respondent! revenue. Based upon the submissions made and its appreciation, of other materials found during the cause of search (including the returns filed and its supporting documents), the ITSC made its final order on 8th February, 2013. In the meanwhile, original assessee i.e. M/s Rishi Promoters Pvt. Ltd. was amalgamated with M!s. BDR Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd with effect from 01.04.2012 by order of this Court dated 20.02.2013. Consequently, for AY 2007-08, the total income assessed in the hands of BDR Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. was 3,76,90,206/- and to the account of M!s. Rishi Promoters, it was 7,17,237/-. The ITSC had in its order dealt with the question whether bogus share money had been introduced by the applicants and observed as follows:
