9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f MVL for the AYs 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14, but no order u/s. 163 of the Act has been passed by the AO holding KRPL as representative assessee of MVL. The assessment order passed in the name of KRPL treating it as representative of MVL without passing order u/s. 163 of the Act lacks jurisdiction and hence, suffers from incurable legal infirmity. In the instant case though at the time of issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, MVL was very much in existence. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act was rightly issued in the name of MVL. Thereafter, MVL was dissolved on 23/05/2018. The information regarding dissolution of MVL was conveyed to the Assessing Officer on 18/10/2018, yet the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act in the name of MVL, a non-existing entity. No notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was served in the name of KRPL. The notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act in the name of a non-existing entity itself makes the assessment null and void. Further, the assessment made in the name of KRPL as representative assessee of MVL without a separate order u/s. 163 of the Act, makes the assessment null and void. Decided against revenue. - SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 03/2018. MVL in response to notice u/s.148 of the Act vide letter dated 30/04/2018 asked the Assessing Officer to treat return filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act as return filed u/s. 148 of the Act. MVL was dissolved on 23/05/2018 and fact was informed to the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 18/10/2018. Despite the fact that the Assessing Officer was aware of dissolution of MVL, he issued notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act on 25/10/2018 in the name of MVL, a non-existing entity. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued summons u/s.131 of the Act on 07/12/2018 to Keystone Realtors Pvt. Ltd. ( in short KRPL ), wherein the Assessing Officer inter-alia show caused KRPL/respondent to explain as to why it should not be treated as representative assessee u/s. 163 of the Act. The respondent/KRPL gave a detailed reply to summons on 17/12/2018. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued show cause notice u/s. 163 of the Act on 21/12/2018 to treat KRPL as agent of MVL for the assessment year 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14. The said notice was received by the respondent on 24/12/2018. The Assessing Officer without passing the order u/s. 163 of the Act passed the draft assessment order u/s. 144C(1) r.w.s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17/03/2015 Assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act made in the name of MVL. 31/03/2018 Notice u/s.148 of the Act issued in the name of MVL. 30/04/2018 MVL filed letter in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act to treats its return of income filed u/s.139(1) as return u/s. 148 of the Act. 23/05/2018 MVL dissolved. 18/10/2018 The A.O was informed about dissolution of MVL. 25/10/2018 Notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act issued in the name of MVL. On various dates Notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act issued in the name of MVL. 07/12/2018 Summons u/s. 131 of the Act issued to KRPL. 17/12/2018 Reply of KRPL in response to summons u/s. 131 of the Act. 21/12/2018 Show cause notice u/s. 163 of the Act to treat KRPL as representative assessee of MVL for the A.Ys 2011-12, 2012-13 2013-14. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inting such person as assessee in representative capacity. The requirement for passing an order u/s. 163 of the Act for appointing a person as an agent is borne out from the fact that the said order is appealable. Section 246(1) of the Act list out the orders against which appeal is maintainable before the CIT(A). An order made u/s. 163 of the Act treating the assessee as an agent of a Non-resident is an appealable order and is mentioned against clause (d) of section246(1) of the Act. Thus, from conjoint reading of section 163 and section 246(1)(d) of the Act, it is unambiguously clear that before treating any person as agent a separate order has to be passed u/s. 163 of the Act, after affording opportunity of hearing to such a person on whom a liability in respect of a Non-resident is to be fastened. 9. In the instance case, we find that though the Assessing Officer has issued show cause notice u/s. 163 of the Act to KRPL to treat it as representative assessee of MVL for the Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14, but no order u/s. 163 of the Act has been passed by the Assessing Officer holding KRPL as representative assessee of MVL. The assessment order passed in the na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
