ICICI

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Is assessment order passed in the name of a nonexistent company sustainable in the eyes of law?

LinkedIn


Court :
ITAT Mumbai

Brief :
This appeal in ITA No.7066/Mum/2019 for A.Y.2016-17 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-24/ITO-15(1)(1)/it-307/2018-19 dated 26/08/2019 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

Citation :
ITA No.7066/Mum/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI
BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
&
SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.7066/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year :2016-17)

M/s. White Crow Research Private Limited (as a successor to Arpeo Data Research Private Limited) A-101/106, Supreme Business Park, Behind Lake Castle, Hiranandani Gardens Powai, Mumbai

vs

Income Tax Officer Ward 15(1)(1) Aayakar Bhavan Maharshi Karve Road Mumbai – 400 020

Assessee by Shri K. Kaushal & Ms. Hirali Desai
Revenue by Shri Mehul Jain
Date of Hearing 11/10/2021
Date of Pronouncement 20/10/2021

O R D E R

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in passing the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 24 December 2018 in the name of 'Arpeo Data Research Private Limited', an entity which was not in existence on the date of passing the impugned order on account of its amalgamation with the Appellant.

2. The primary facts pertaining to adjudication of aforesaid additional grounds are that Arpeo Data Research Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as or 'amalgamating company') having PAN AAJCA3506F is a company which was incorporated in March 2011 and is engaged in the business of providing HR Consultancy and Support Services. It had filed its return of income for AY 2016-17 on 30/11/2016 declaring total income of Rs. 15,76,630 with Income-tax Officer - 15(1)(1), Mumbai.

3. We find that merely because the assessee has participated in the assessment proceedings, the stay proceedings and penalty proceedings post completion of assessment, the inherent defects embedded in the assessment order by way of framing the assessment in the name of non-existent entity would not get cured. It is elementary that “there can be no estoppel against this statute”.

4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 20/10/2021 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board.

Please find attached the enclosed file for the full judgement
 

 

LinkedIn







Trending Tags