TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Delhi High Court was accordingly taken on record by the Registrar of Companies. In the aforesaid scenario the assessee was not an existing legal entity w.e.f 1st April 2005 when the assessment order was passed by the AO on 31.10.2006, so the assessment order is a nullity in the eyes of law and so is void. Therefore we quash the impugned order passed by the AO on 31.102006 and so the additional ground allowed in favour of assessee. 10. Since we have quashed the assessment proceedings we are not inclined to adjudicate other grounds raised by the assessee and the revenue being academic. - ITA No. 1824/Del/2011 & ITA No. 2358/Del/2011 - - - Dated:- 4-3-2015 - SHRI S.V. MEHTORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied on the following orders:- 1. Central Camera C. (P) Ltd. Vs. The Government of Madras, Equivalent citation (1971) 27 STC 112 (Mad). 2. M.M.Annaiah Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Equivalent citation (1970) 76 ITR 582 (Kar) 3. M/s. The co-op Industrial Estates Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer, ITA No.658/Hyd/2008. 5. The issue whether a legal ground can be raised for the first time before this Tribunal is no longer res-integra. In NTPC Vs CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383, the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that question of law raised for the first time can be adjudicated by the Tribunal. Therefore we admit the legal ground as to whether the impugned order passed against the non-existent entity is a nullity or not. 6. The l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edural defect. 10. Section 481 of the Companies Act provides for dissolution of the company. The Company Judge in the High Court can order dissolution of a company on the grounds stated therein. The effect of the dissolution is that the company no more survives. The dissolution puts an end to the existence of the company. It is held in M.H. Smith (Plant Hire) Ltd. Vs. D.L. Mainwaring (T/A Inshore), 1986 BCLC 342 (CA) that once a company is dissolved it becomes a non-existent party and therefore no action can be brought in its name. Thus an insurance company which was subrogated to the rights of another insured company was held not to be entitled to maintain an action in the name of the company after the latter had been dissolved. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e copy of the order of the Delhi High Court was accordingly taken on record by the Registrar of Companies. 9. In the aforesaid scenario the assessee was not an existing legal entity w.e.f 1st April 2005 when the assessment order was passed by the AO on 31.10.2006, so the assessment order is a nullity in the eyes of law and so is void. Therefore we quash the impugned order passed by the AO on 31.102006 and so the additional ground raised by the assessee is thus allowed. 10. Since we have quashed the assessment proceedings we are not inclined to adjudicate other grounds raised by the assessee and the revenue being academic. 11. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
