9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner entity was surrendered, deactivated after its amalgamation and merged with the MPIDC. Hence, in the instant case as pointed out earlier the fact of amalgamation was well within the knowledge of the assessing officer. In the case at hand, admittedly, the order under Section 148A(d) of Act, has been passed by the respondent against a non existent entity. Therefore, the impugned order is bad in the eyes of law. Decided in favour of assessee. - HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI AND HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA Shri Siddharth Shrivastava Advocate for the petitioner Shri Harpreet Singh Gupta Advocate for the respondent ORDER In the instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 21.03.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') by respondent No. 3 in case No. ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2023-24 /1063125561(1) for the Assessment Year 2020-21 inter alia on the ground that the same were passed against an entity which has been amalgamated with another entity with effect from 01.04.2018 and by virtue of which has ceased to remain in existence. Therefore, ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsferring of TDS credit and had duly informed the same to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Admin TDS). 5. Further, the Respondent No.3 issued a show cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax act 1961 to the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2020-21 wherein it was stated that. the MPAKVN i.e. assesse has not filed any Income Tax Return (ITR) for the year under consideration and in absence thereof, the transaction reflected by the respondent no. 3 were alleged to be unexplained and undisclosed, resultantly, the petitioner was directed to furnish reply seeking explanation as to why notice u/s148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 should not be issued for the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment to the tune of Rs. 66,14,59,826. 6. Petitioner submitted his reply to the aforesaid notice stating therin that the erstwhile MPAKVNs situated at Bhopal, Indore, Jabalpur, Ujjain, Rewa, Sagar and IIDC, Gwalior, stood amalgamated into the MPTRIFAC (subsequently renamed as MPIDC) with effect from 01.04.2018 the individual pan number of various MPAKVN s were duly surrendered and deactivated and merged with the PAN number of MPIDC too. Therefore, the PAN number issued to MPAKVN, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assed the wrong order in question. He further submitted that an identical circumstance had arisen for the assessment Year 2019-20 wherein the Respondent no.3 after duly considering the reply submitted by the petitioner himself hold that MPAKVN, Bhopal stood merged with the MPIDC and dropped the proceedings u/s 148 (A)(b) of the act for the assessment Year 2019-20 on the very same ground as raised in the instant petition. It was also held that all the transactions of the said financial year has duly been incorporated in the audited financial statement of the new entity. He further argued that the respondent no. 3 ought to have appreciated the fact that identical proceedings were also initiated by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Katni and Sagar and the same were also dropped on the grounds that amalgamation of MPAKVN into the MPIDC with effect from 01.04.18. The petitioner further submitted that the respondent authority smacks foul of malafide and ulterior motives as they have preconceived notion against the petitioner, which has the effect of only penalizing the petitioner. Further, the impugned orders have been passed in utter violations of the principles of natural justi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der u/s 148A(d) of the Act dated 21.03.2024 was passed after obtaining approval from competent authority. The petitioner stated incorrect facts that he has filed an application for granting adjournment to file reply whereas no adjournment application was submitted by the assessee with respect to the captioned show cause notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act dated 09.03.2024 either on email of this office or on e filing portal. It is submitted that the assessee was categorically showcaused to establish that all the transactions undertaken by the transferor company i.e., MPAKVN, Bhopal were duly incorporated in the audited financial statement of the transferee entity i.e., MPIDC. He prays for dismissal of the petition. In Support of his contention, he relied upon the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 Vs. Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd. reportd in Manu/SC/0410/2022. 9. Heard. 10. The main contention of the petitioner's counsel is that the impugned order is unsustainable in as much as the petitioner entity i.e. MPAKVN, Bhopal has already been amalgamated with MPIDC with effect from 01.04.2018. It is urged that the action of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nactment. Broadly, the quest of legal systems and courts has been to locate if a successor or representative exists in relation to the particular cause or action, upon whom the assets might have devolved or upon whom the liability in the event it is adjudicated, would fall. ... 12. While passing the said judgment, the Hon ble Supreme Court has also noticed its earlier judgment passed in the case of Maruti Suzuki (India) Ltd. (Supra), however, the same has been distinguished on the facts but still holds the field subject to proper scrutiny of the facts. 13. On perusal of above mentioned judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court specifically noticed and distinguished the facts of Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd (Supra) with the Maruti Suzuki (India) Ltd. (Supra) stating therein that in Mahagun's case the amalgamation was known to the assessee, but he supressed the same even at the stage when the search and seizure operations took place, as well as statements were recorded by the revenue of the directors and managing director of the group. A return was filed, pursuant to notice, which also suppressed the fact of amalgamation. Though that entity ceased to be in existence, in law, yet, appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
