2018 (5) TMI 701

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Bhattahcaryya, Adv ORDER The Court : The limited question which impresses this Court is whether the arbitral tribunal could have upheld the commissioner's order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without addressing the appellant's challenge thereto on the ground that the appellant had not been served any notice prior to such order being made and th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n, the previous liabilities of the original entity fasten on to the subsequent entity. It can also not be disputed that if a particular assessing officer and a relevant commissioner had jurisdiction over the original entity, such authorities would continue to have jurisdiction to reopen the matter pertaining to previous assessment years when the entity was in existence. The objections raised on su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the relevant commissioner that the appellant did not have any prior knowledge of the commissioner reopening the matter or intending to pass any order under Section 263 of the Act. While it appears that the order of the commissioner referred to a notice dated March 18, 2013 and such notice remaining unattended to and a further notice informing the assessee of a fresh hearing on March 18, 2013, it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... original assessee had no notice or knowledge of any hearing fixed by the commissioner prior to the commissioner passing the order under Section 263 of the Act. It is possible that in the wake of the many matters involving the same issue, this special feature of the matter escaped the attention of the tribunal. However, it was imperative for the appellate tribunal to address the issue since a prev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the appellant to feign ignorance by merely stating that the noticee was erroneously addressed to a defunct entity. ITA No. 25 of 2018 and GA No.450 of 2017 are disposed of by setting aside the order impugned dated August 10, 2015 in so far as it concerns Brolly Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. for the appellate tribunal to apply its mind to the limited issue indicated hereinabove and pass a fresh reasoned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X