Case Law Details
Diversey India Hygiene Private Limited Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court)
The Bombay High Court recently adjudicated on two writ petitions filed by Diversey India Hygiene Private Limited (“Petitioner”) against the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (“AO”). The primary contention of the Petitioner was that the notices were issued to a non-existing entity, as Diversey India Private Limited (“DIPL”) had been amalgamated with the Petitioner. The court’s decision, as reflected in Writ Petition No. 3034 of 2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17 and Writ Petition No. 3505 of 2022 for AY 2017-18, offers crucial insights into the legality of reassessment proceedings in such circumstances.
Background of the Case
The central issue in both petitions revolved around notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”). The Petitioner argued that these notices, dated 30th March 2021, and subsequent notices under Section 142(1) of the Act were directed to a non-existing entity, DIPL. The Petitioner emphasized that DIPL had amalgamated with it, effective from 1st April 2015, and, as per legal precedents, any notice or assessment in the name of the amalgamating company post-amalgamation is without jurisdiction.
Legal Precedents Invoked
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
