9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] - 35, New Delhi dated 25.10.2017 pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15. Since both these appeals were heard together, these are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. At the very outset, let us understand the clear facts of the case which would be clear from the following order of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WPC 686/2017 and CM No 29390/2019. The most relevant part of the said judgment reads as under: 1. Aggrieved by one portion of the assessment order concerning the alleged liability of the Petitioner (hereafter the Assessee‟) under Sections 115-QA and 115-QB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Act‟) in the impugned assessment order dated 31st December, 2016 passed by the Assessing Officer ( AO‟) (Respondent No. 1), the Assessee has approached this Court with the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Along with the petition, an application being CM No.3141/2017 was filed seeking interim directions to restrain the Respondents from enforcing the demand in terms of the impugned order. 2. By the impugned assessment order, inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot limited to the issues raised in the present petition as well as on the response thereto by the Revenue in accordance with law. (iv) The reasoned order shall be passed by the CIT (A) not later than 31st October, 2019. It will be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. For a period of two weeks after the date of such communication of order, the demand under the impugned assessment order, if it is affirmed by the CIT (A) in appeal, will not be enforced against the Assessee. (v) The Court places on record the statement of the Revenue that it will not raise any objection before the CIT (A) as to the maintainability of such an appeal and as to the appeal being barred by limitation. The Court also takes on record the statement of the Revenue that it will not enforce the demand in terms of the impugned assessment order till the disposal of the above appeal. All of the above is subject to the Assessee filing the appeal before the CIT (A) within ten days from today. (vi) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view whatsoever on the contentions of either party on the merits of the case. 28. The writ petition and pending application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer hereinafter referred to as AO } has erred in completing the assessment on the Appellant for the assessment Year 2014-15 disregarding the fact that the Appellant has merged with Genpact India Private Limited and hence, the order passed u/s 143(3) is without jurisdiction, bad in law, void-abtio and is liable to be quashed. 2. That on facts and in law the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) {herein above referred as CIT(A) } erred in upholding that while computing deduction u/s 10AA of the Act following :receipts are to be excluded within the ambit of export turnover as defined in explanation 1 (i) to sec 10AA of the Act: (a) Telecommunication Expenses ₹ 8,53,88,879/- (b) Recovery of expenses in respect of migration on-the-job training expenses ₹ 195,93,29,278/- 3. That on facts and in law CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that recovery of expenses in respect migration/ on-the-job training services and telecommunication expenses were not included in the figure of export turnover considered by the Appellant while computing deduction u/s 10AA of the :t. 4. That on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of AO partl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rities. The reliance upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (Supra) by the Ld. AR is apt in the present case. The Hon ble Supreme Court observed in para 19 as follows: 19. (iii) Thirdly, the consequence of the scheme of amalgamation approved under Section 394 of the Companies Act 1956 is that the amalgamating company ceased to exist. In Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd., the principle has been formulated by this Court in the following observations: 5. Generally, where only one company is involved in change and the rights of the shareholders and creditors are varied, it amounts to reconstruction or reorganisation of scheme of arrangement. In amalgamation two or more companies are fused into one by merger or by taking over by another. Reconstruction or amalgamation has no precise legal meaning. The amalgamation is a blending of two or more 30 [2019] 260 Taxman 412 (Del.) 31 (2019) 261 Taxman 137 (Guj) existing undertakings into one undertaking, the shareholders of each blending company become substantially the shareholders in the company which is to carry on the blended undertakings. There may be amalgamatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
