2023 (5) TMI 558 - SCH - Income Tax

Disallowance of business loss and unabsorbed depreciation of amalgamated company (Dolphin Laboratories) - Scheme of amalgamation conceived - cut off date OR appointed date OR date of amalgamation - HELD THAT - High Court has heavily relied upon the earlier decision of the High Court in the case of IRM Limited 2016 (7) TMI 972 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT which was rendered after following the decision of this Court in Marshall Sons Co. (India) Ltd. 1996 (11) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT as held once the scheme is sanctioned, the same would relate back to the appointed date of amalgamation. Revenue is not in a position to point out any contrary decision of this Court taking a contrary view than the view taken in the case of Marshall Sons Co. (India) Ltd. (supra). No interference of this Court in High court decision - SLP dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the interpretation of a scheme involving the amalgamation of companies, the significance of the date of amalgamation, and the validity of notices issued by the Income Tax Officer.

Interpretation of Scheme and Date of Amalgamation:
The Supreme Court examined a case where the High Court heavily relied on previous decisions to determine the date of amalgamation of companies. The High Court opined that the date specified in the scheme was "totally artificial and arbitrary" and held that the date of the High Court's approval should be considered as the date of amalgamation. The Court discussed clauses of the scheme, emphasizing the conditions for implementation and shareholder involvement. The High Court's decision was based on previous rulings and Full Bench decisions, ultimately upholding the validity of notices issued by the Income Tax Officer.

Validity of Notices Issued by Income Tax Officer:
The Revenue, feeling aggrieved by the High Court's judgment, filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. The Court heard arguments from the learned ASG representing the Revenue, who could not cite any contrary decision by the Court. As a result, the Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the High Court's judgment and dismissed the Special Leave Petition. Pending applications were disposed of accordingly.