Case Law Details
Culver Max Entertainment Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
The short issue agitated in appeal before us is, validity of assessment order passed in the name of a Non-existing entity. Undisputedly, the draft assessment order and the directions of the DRP are in the name of ‘SPENI’ i.e. the erstwhile entity. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court approved the Scheme of Amalgamation of ‘SPENI’ with ‘SPNI’ vide order dated 01/07/2016. The assessee vide communication dated 16/01/2017 informed the Assessing Officer about the fact of merger of ‘SPENI’ with ‘SPNI’ and the consequent change in name. The fact of intimation of change in name has not been disputed by Revenue. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has placed on record photocopy of the communication dated 16/01/2017 bearing the office stamp of DCIT(IT), Circle 4(2)(1) to substantiate that the Assessing Officer was informed about the change in name of assessee consequent to amalgamation well before passing of the final assessment order. The Assessing Officer passed the final assessment order on 31/01/2017. The documents on record clearly indicate that the Assessing Officer was informed about the change in name. Despite intimation, the Assessing Officer passed the final assessment order in the name of a non-existing entity. The Apex Court in the case of PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (supra) held that where assessee company was amalgamated with another company and thereby lost its existence, assessment order passed subsequently in the name of the said non-existing entity is without jurisdiction, hence, liable to be set-aside.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
This appeal by the assessee is directed against assessment order dated 31/01/2017 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’].
2. Shri P.J.Pardiwala appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted at the outset that at this stage he is only pressing legal issue that is: The impugned assessment order has been passed in the name of a non-existing entity. Hence, the assessment order is bad in law.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
