9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 1154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere issued to the assessee however, no compliance was made. Thus the AO finally issued notice to its director Shri Kapil Goel. In reply, the director of the assessee company stated that the company has already been stuck off from the Register of Companies by the Registrar of the Companies (ROC, in short), therefore, the present proceedings u/s 148 against such company be dropped. The AO dismissed the claim of assessee and by observing that during the year assessee has increased its Share capital by Rs. 42,05,200/- and share premium by Rs. 63,07,800/- and the immediate source of the same has remained unexplained, made the total addition of Rs. 1,05,13,000/-, u/s 68 of the Act being the amount of Share capital and share premium received during the year. In first appeal assessee contended that when the notice u/s 148 was issued, the assessee company was struck off by the ROC and when it is cessed to exits, the entire reassessment proceedings based on the notice issued on non-existent entity is void ab initio. However, ld. CIT(A), NFAC has not accepted the contention of the assessee and dismissed the appeal by confirming the additions made. 3. Against the said order of the NFAC, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act, bad in law and are contrary to the facts. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the reopening despite the fact there is no live nexus between the reasons recorded and the belief formed by the assessing officer. 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the reopening despite the fact that the same has been made by the AO on the basis of borrowed satisfaction without independent application of mind. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A), has erred, both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the learned AO without obtaining prior valid approval of the prescribed authority under the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 11. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law, in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in passing the order on the basis of material collected at the back of the assessee without giving it an opportunity to rebut the same in violation of principle of natural ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r submits that it is a well settled law that an assessment order against a company that had been dissolved and struck off from the Register of Companies u/s 560 of The Companies Act, 2013 was not valid as once a company is dissolved, it ceases to exits in the eyes of law. He thus submit that it cannot be treated as a person against whom re-assessment proceedings could be initiated under the Act. He placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vived Marketing Servieing Pvt. Ltd. 2009 (9) TMI 917. He also placed reliance on various judgments of other High Courts and Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal which are as under: (i) Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court M/s. Rainawari Finance & Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Jammu 2023 (11) TMI 812. (ii) ITO, Ward No.2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/s Sil Verline Trading Company Ltd., 2023 (12) TMI 544. (iii) Jitendra Chandralal Navlani vs. Union of India [2024] 159 taxmann.com 498 (Mum.) 7. With regard to the judgment in the case of Ravindra Kumar Aggarwal vs. Income Tax Officer [2023] 146 taxmannn.com 205 (Delhi), relying upon by CIT(A), NFAC while dismissing the appeal of the assessee on this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was void ab initio and participation of the company cannot be operate as an estoppel against law. 10. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vived Marketing Servieing Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held as under: "When the Assessing Officer passed the order of assessment against the respondent company, it had already been dissolved and struck off in the register of the Registrar of companies under Section 560 of the Companies Act. In these circumstances, the Tribunal rightly held that there could not have been any assessment order passed against the company which was not in existence as on that date in the eyes of law it had already been dissolved. The Tribunal relied upon its earlier decision in Impsat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO 276 ITR 136 (AT). We are of the opinion that the view taken by the Tribunal is perfectly valid and in accordance with law. No substantial question of law arises. Dismissed." The Hon'ble Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court in the case of Rainawari Finance & Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held as under: "21. Be that as it may, now it has come to light that on the date the assessment order was passed, the appellant-company stood dissolved unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. The Tribunal relied upon its earlier decision in Impsat Pvt. Ltd. v. ITA 276 ITR 136 (AT). We are of the opinion that the view taken by the Tribunal is perfectly valid and in accordance with law. No substantial question of law arises. Dismissed." 23...... 24. We, thus, answer the question by holding that once a company is dissolved under Section 560(5) of the Companies Act, it ceases to exist and, therefore, no order of assessment could be validly passed against it under the Income Tax Act and if it is passed, it would be a nullity. Having answered the aforesaid question, we allow the appeal and set aside the order of assessment dated 21.12.2006, order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jammu dated 01.04.2013 and the order of the Tribunal dated 30.01.2014." 10. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Marut Nandan & Co. vs. ITO [2025] (2) TMI-829 has held that re-assessment noticed issued u/s 148 of the Act in the name of the non-existent entity is clearly vitiated and rendered nonest in law by respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki has quashed the order u/s 148 of the Act. 11. In v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
