TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 887X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3), read with sec. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee-company, M/s. Meridian Industries Ltd. had merged with M/s. Precot Mills Ltd. with effect from 1.4.2006. Thereafter on merger, the company came to known as M/s. Precot Industries Ltd. The merger was approved by the Hon ble High Court of Madras. The Hon ble High Court passed its order on 1st June, 2006. It was specifically observed by the Hon ble Court that the transferor company viz., Meridian Industries Limited be and hereby dissolved being wound up. 3. The assessee-company, M/s. Meridian Industries Ltd. filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year on 1.11.2004. A total taxable income of ₹ 2,72,72,310/- was returned by the company. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive additions made by the assessing authority have been challenged in first appeal before the Commissioner of Incometax( Appeals). In addition to those grounds, the assessee has also challenged validity of reopening of the assessment on the ground that the notice under sec.148 was issued to a non-existing company. The assessee company argued before the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) that the Hon ble Madras High Court has passed merger order on 1.6.2006, whereby it has approved the merger of the assessee-company with M/s. Precot Mills Ltd. to be known as Precot Industries Ltd. The assessee also pointed out that by the order of the Hon ble High Court the assesseecompany has dissolved being wound up. The assessee also argued before the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT in ITA No.475/11 has held that the assessment in the hands of the amalgamating company is invalid when the notice of amalgamation was given to the Assessing Officer much prior to the completion of assessment. As seen from the details, in the instant case, the notice of amalgamation was given to the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 1.11.2006, but the assessment was completed on 16.12.2011. The appellant company was not in existence after 1.4.2006 vide order of the Hon ble Madras High Court date 1.9.2006. Thus, once the company cease to exist, there was no question of being assessed for incometax. Hence, the assessment is not valid in law and is annulled. Accordingly, he set aside the income escaping assessment as null and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri K. Ravi, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee. 10. The main thrust of the argument of the Revenue is that the assessment involved in the present case is 2004-05 and the dissolution of the company was only with effect from 1.4.2006 and as such, the technical dissolution of the assessee-company would not invalidate the notice issued under sec.148 on 3.3.2011. The learned Commissioner argued that even if the notice under sec.148 was issued on 3.3.2011, the fact remains that the subject assessment year was 2004-05. 11. As rightly pointed out by the Commissioner of Incometax( Appeals), the Hon ble Supreme Court has considered the effect of amalgamation in the case of General Radio and Appliances Co. Ltd. vs. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
