Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (8) TMI 55

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ard and set off of loss u/s Sec. 72A - HELD THAT:- In this case, the scheme of amalgamation has been approved by the Hon ble High Court of Judicature at Madras under the Companies Act, 1956 w.e.f. 01.04.2013. It is settled law that once amalgamation is approved, the amalgamating company ceasing to exist, it can t be regarded as a person u/s. 2(31) of the Act against whom assessment proceedings can be initiated or an order of assessment passed. Therefore, appointed date, 01.04.2013, is crucial in this case. As on 31.03.2013, the assessee company had only 26% of equity shares in the transferor company, and therefore, the provisions of section 2 (1B) r.w.s 72A of the Income Tax Act have not been complied with by the assessee. Since, the as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of equity shares as on 01.04.2013 which is the appointed dated as per the scheme approved by the Hon ble High Court of Madras on 28.4.2014, the A O held that it is evident that the precondition for amalgamation , i.e. shareholders holding of not less than three-fourths in value of the shares in the amalgamating company becoming shareholders of the amalgamated company was not satisfied. As the requirements laid down in Sec. 2(1B) were not fully satisfied on the court appointed date of 01.04.2013, the AO held that the assessee is not entitled to the claim of carry forward and set off of loss u/s Sec. 72A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence disallowed the assessee s claim and completed the assessment . Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d the vesting of and carry forward of loss by Appellant which is binding on the statutory authorities including income-tax authorities. 6. The CIT (A) Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred by upholding the denial of carry forward of loss and unabsorbed depreciation made by the Learned AO, stating that the taxing statute be interpreted strictly, without having regard to the legal position applicable to the facts in hand. 7. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify all or any grounds of appeal at or before the hearing of appeal. 3. The case was heard through video conferencing. The Ld. AR submitted that as on 01.04.2013, only 26% of shares were held by the assessee company with Espiem Plastics Ltd. On 10. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as well as Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd., the transferee company, sought the sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation before the Hon ble High Court of Judicature at Madras so as to be binding on all the equity shareholders of the transferor/transferee company w.e.f. 01.04.2013. The Hon ble High Court of Judicature in Comp. Petn No. 111 and 112 of 2014 dated 28.04.2014 sanctioned the scheme of amalgamation w.e.f. 01.04.2013 and declared that it is binding on all the equity shareholders of the said companies w.e.f. 01.04.2013. Thus, the appointed date for amalgamation is 01.04.2013. The assessee has not disputed the fact that as on 31.03.2013, the assessee was holding only 26% of equity shares in the transferor company. Since, the assessee i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... therefore the provisions of section 2(1B) have not been violated. Thus, on the facts, this case law offers no help to the assessee. In this case, the scheme of amalgamation has been approved by the Hon ble High Court of Judicature at Madras under the Companies Act, 1956 w.e.f. 01.04.2013. It is settled law that once amalgamation is approved, the amalgamating company ceasing to exist, it can t be regarded as a person u/s. 2(31) of the Act against whom assessment proceedings can be initiated or an order of assessment passed. Therefore, appointed date, 01.04.2013, is crucial in this case. As on 31.03.2013, the assessee company had only 26% of equity shares in the transferor company, and therefore, the provisions of section 2 (1B) r.w.s 72A of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates