9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 46 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment - addition u/s 68 - whether assessment on the company which is liquidated and struck off by the Registrar of Companies is invalid - Held that - AO has invoked the provisions of section 147 and served the notice on a company which is altogether a different company and has also issued notice u/s 142(1) to the erstwhile Director who has already submitted that the company which has been assessed has been liquidated on 25.03.2008. We are of the opinion that the issuance of notice u/s 148 on a (different company) i.e. another legal entity namely M/s. SRSR Advisory (P) Ltd makes the proceedings void ab initio as notice has been issued to the wrong entity. Hence we confirm the order of the CIT (A) and dismiss the Revenue s appeal. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
Appeals by Revenue against Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) order for A.Y 2004-05 regarding assessment of various liquidated companies. Analysis: Issue 1: Assessment of M/s. Pallavi Real Estates & Developers Pvt. Ltd. The AO made an addition u/s 68 for an amount of &8377; 4,16,33,166. The AR argued that the assessment on the liquidated company was invalid. The CIT (A) held that provisions of the Income Tax Act regarding companies in liquidation cannot be extended to assess a company liquidated four years ago. The Tribunal confirmed the CIT (A) order, stating that the notice served on a different company made the proceedings void ab initio. Issue 2: Assessment of M/s Ugandhar Estates Pvt. Ltd. Similar to the previous case, the AO added an amount u/s 68. The CIT (A) reiterated that assessing a company liquidated four years ago using section 148 provisions is not permissible. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, adopting the same conclusions as in the previous case. Issue 3: Assessment of M/s Girivardhan Estates Pvt. Ltd. The AO raised a demand of &8377; 2,88,30,095 by adding an amount u/s 68. The CIT (A) found the proceedings flawed due to the notice being served on a different company. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A) order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. Issue 4: Assessment of M/s Yeshwant Property Developers Pvt. Ltd. Similar to previous cases, the AO added an amount u/s 68. The Tribunal found the notice served on a different company rendered the proceedings void ab initio. The order of the CIT (A) was confirmed, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Issue 5: Assessment of M/s Jyotsna Properties Pvt. Ltd. The AO added an amount u/s 68, raising a demand of &8377; 2,88,50,431. The CIT (A) found the notice served on a different company invalidated the proceedings. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A) order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed all appeals by the Revenue against the orders of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) for various liquidated companies, emphasizing the invalidity of assessing companies liquidated years ago and the importance of serving notices on the correct entities to maintain the legality of proceedings.
|
