2022 (7) TMI 337 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Notice issued against a non-existent company - Scheme of amalgamation Conceived - HELD THAT - Petitioner states that Income Tax Officer Ward No. 19(1), Delhi has issued a letter dated 27th May, 2022 to the Petitioner stating that the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act between 01st April, 2021 to 30th June, 2021 have been held by the Supreme Court in Union of India Ors. vs Ashish Agarwal, 2022 (5) TMI 240 - SUPREME COURT to be show cause notices under Section 148A(b) of the Act and initiated fresh reassessment proceedings against the amalgamated company. In the opinion of this Court, the Petitioner should take all its objections in its reply to be filed before the Assessing Officer in the proceedings under Section 148A of the Act. In the event, the time for filing the reply has expired, the Petitioner is given liberty to raise additional grounds by filing a supplementary reply within a week. In case, the Petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the Assessing Officer, it shall be open to the Petitioner to challenge the same in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
Clarification of order regarding notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against a dissolved company.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought clarification of the order dated 19th January, 2022, which quashed the impugned notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against a dissolved company. The petitioner's counsel referred to a previous judgment and argued that the notice was non-est as it targeted a non-existent entity. The petitioner highlighted that the company had been dissolved following its amalgamation with another company, and the jurisdictional Assessing Officer had been informed about this dissolution. Despite this, the impugned notice was issued, which the petitioner contended was not maintainable. The counsel relied on the Supreme Court's decision in PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited to support this argument.

The Income Tax Officer had issued a letter stating that the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act had been held to be show cause notices under Section 148A(b) by the Supreme Court in a different case. The court directed the petitioner to raise all objections in the reply to be filed before the Assessing Officer in the proceedings under Section 148A. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit additional grounds through a supplementary reply if the time for filing the initial reply had lapsed. Furthermore, if dissatisfied with the Assessing Officer's decision, the petitioner was given the right to challenge it in accordance with the law. The application was disposed of with the aforementioned directions and liberty granted to the petitioner.