TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd March, 2016 by the PCIT under Section 263 of Act and consequential order dated 31st March, 2016 were in respect of a non-existent entity and were clearly void ab initio, as correctly held by the ITAT. This, by itself, was sufficient for the ITAT to set aside the impugned order dated 31st March, 2016. - ITA 466/2017 - - - Dated:- 25-7-2017 - S. Muralidhar And Prathiba M. Singh, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Deepak Anand, Advocate with Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Gautam Jain, Advocate with Mr. Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocate ORDER 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Act ) directed against an order dated 16th December, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o SHL. According to the learned counsel for the Respondent, during the course of the re-assessment proceedings, the AO was informed by Mr. Vishal Malik, whose statement is recorded on oath and happened to be a former Director of KPPL, inter alia that the Company got merged in AAS Research and Solutions (P) Ltd. on 8/10/2010 and that he was working as a Director in the company also . Therefore, the AO was also aware, at that stage, that KPPL did not exist in law as it had merged with Ventura and had come to be renamed as AAS Research and Solutions (P) Ltd . 6. At the end of that exercise, on 23rd/24th July, 2014, the AO passed the assessment order under Section 147/143(3) of the Act, accepting the return as filed by the Assessee. 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st March, 2016 were both in the name of non-existent entity and, therefore, void ab initio. 11. The ITAT also proceeded to discuss the merits of the order dated 31st March, 2016 passed by the PCIT under Section 263 of the Act and came to the conclusion that it is unsustainable in law. However, for the purpose of the present appeal, the Court does not consider it necessary to examine the order of the PCIT on merits for the simple reason that the law as it stands today is governed by the decision in the Spice Infotainment Ltd. (supra). 12. It must be pointed out that the counsel for the Revenue has drawn the attention of this Court to an order dated 10th January, 2014 passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 120 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
