9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 1071 - AT - Income TaxInvalid intimation passed u/s 143(1) issued in the name of a non-existent entity - scheme of amalgamation conducted - assessee filed revised return of income - HELD THAT - Assessee s own folly has led to dismissal of appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The return was revised two times in the name of new entity to give effect to the scheme of amalgamation. Therefore, it was obligatory for the assessee to file the appeal in the name of new entity only since the appeal could not be filed in the name of non-existent entity and the appeal so filed would be invalid one as rightly held by Ld. CIT(A). Even in the additional ground, the assessee is seeking quashing of intimation which has merely processed assessee s revised return of income and the same has been issued in the same name in which the revised return has been filed by the assessee. If the intimation was to be quashed, as per assessee s additional ground, then the assessee would be liable to refund back the refund granted under the said intimation. There is a vast difference in mere processing of return vis- -vis framing of assessment. Therefore, we do not find any substance in the additional ground raised before us. The same stand dismissed. Proceeding further, we find that Form No.35 was filed within time and the assessee was diligent in preferring further appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Keeping in view the same, we direct assessee to suitably amend Form No. 35 in the name of new entity or alternatively file a fresh Form No. 35 which shall be taken up by Ld. CIT(A) on merits. However, the concession so granted to the assessee would come at a cost of ₹ 10,000/- which shall be deposited by the assessee in Prime Minister National Relief Fund within 15 days of receipt of this order. The proof of the same shall be submitted before the registry as well as before Ld. CIT(A) and the same shall enable Ld. CIT(A) to proceed for adjudication of appeal on merits.
Issues:
1. Validity of intimation passed u/s 143(1) in the name of a non-existent entity. 2. Appeal filed in the name of a non-existent entity leading to dismissal by CIT(A). 3. Additional ground seeking quashing of intimation and refund implications. 4. Direction to amend Form No.35 in the name of the new entity. Analysis: Issue 1: Validity of intimation passed u/s 143(1) in the name of a non-existent entity The assessee contested the intimation passed u/s 143(1) as invalid and bad in law due to being issued in the name of a non-existent entity. The intimation was issued to the assessee, who had revised their return of income twice due to an amalgamation with another entity. The intimation reduced the refund amount due to the assessee and had discrepancies in TDS credit. The Tribunal noted the amalgamation and the subsequent revised returns, emphasizing the importance of filing appeals in the name of the correct entity. The Tribunal upheld the invalidity of the appeal filed in the name of the non-existent entity, leading to dismissal. Issue 2: Appeal filed in the name of a non-existent entity leading to dismissal by CIT(A) The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee as invalid since it was in the name of a non-existent entity. The CIT(A) highlighted the amalgamation of the assessee with another entity and the subsequent revised returns filed. As the appeal was filed in the name of the non-existent entity, it was deemed invalid. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the appeal should have been filed in the name of the new entity resulting from the amalgamation. Issue 3: Additional ground seeking quashing of intimation and refund implications The assessee raised an additional ground seeking the quashing of the intimation passed, which processed the revised return of income. The Tribunal noted that the intimation was issued in the same name in which the revised return was filed. The Tribunal dismissed the additional ground, emphasizing the difference between processing a return and framing an assessment. Quashing the intimation would require the assessee to refund the amount granted. The Tribunal found no merit in the additional ground raised by the assessee. Issue 4: Direction to amend Form No.35 in the name of the new entity The Tribunal directed the assessee to amend Form No.35 in the name of the new entity resulting from the amalgamation or file a fresh form for further appeal before the CIT(A). The Tribunal acknowledged the diligence of the assessee in preferring the appeal and granted a concession to amend the form, subject to a cost of ?10,000 to be deposited in the Prime Minister National Relief Fund. The proof of deposit was required for the appeal to be considered on its merits. In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of filing appeals in the correct entity's name and complying with procedural requirements.
|
