Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2024 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 379 - HC - Income TaxValidity of reassessment proceedings against non-existent firm - petitioner was a partnership firm and was converted as a Private Limited Company - respondent has submitted that the petitioner had used the old PAN in making the transaction and although the firm was dissolved, the PAN of firm dissolved was utilized for transaction and thereby there was escape of tax by the petitioner. HELD THAT:- After the Firm was dissolved on 14.07.2010, a fresh IE Code was issued in the name of petitioner company with the same IEC number. The documents that have been filed by the petitioner in respect of which the proceedings were initiated with the issuance of Notice dated 28.03.2021 u/s 148 for the Assessment Year 2015-2016 pertains to exports made by the petitioner with the same IE Code. Copies of the export shipping bills shows that the PAN Number of the company with the above IE Code has been declared. Similarly, some of the copies of the Bill of Entries filed by the petitioner before this Court also indicate that the Bills of Entry also contain the PAN number of the petitioner company with the same IE Code and not the PAN number of the Partnership Firm which seems to expire with effect from 14.07.2010. The petitioner has also filed Copy of Form 15 CA acknowledgement with respect to Remittance to non-resident or foreign company which also indicate the name of the petitioner Company with the petitioner's PAN number. On the other hand, the impugned order itself has been passed in the name of the non-existing firm based on a notice that was issued in the name of non-existing Firm. All along the petitioner has replied to the Department. Department has failed to take note of the same and has thus confirmed the demand. The consequences in the impugned order is thus unsustainable. That apart for the subsequent Assessment Year, namely the Assessment Year 2016-2017, a notice was issued u/s 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was issued under the same circumstances. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax NON CORP WARD 11(3) CHE has also rightly dropped the proceedings by an order dated 30.03.2023 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Although the Court would have been justified in referring the petitioner to workout the remedy before the Appellate Commissioner, Court is of the view that this is a fit case for interfering with the order passed by the respondents as it is arbitrary and shows the clear non-application of mind. Impugned Order and the impugned notice u/s 147/148A are set aside. Writ Petition stands allowed.
|