TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitions. Accordingly, we hereby allow the petitions and quash and set aside Notice issued. - R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5803 of 2022, 5804 of 2022, 5805 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 21-6-2022 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA MR DHINAL A SHAH FOR THE PETITIONER MR MANISH BHATT FOR M R BHATT CO. FOR THE RESPONDENT JUDGMENT PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Dhinal A.Shah for the petitioner and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Manish Bhatt for M.R.Bhatt Co. for the respondent. 2. RULE. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Manish Bhatt waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. 3. The issue involved in these petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 142(1) dated 10.11.2021 asking for various details and information for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 5.5 The petitioner again filed objection on 13.11.2021 and raised specific objection about issuance of the impugned notice to a non-existent entity since the company was merged way back in the year 2004. 5.6 Thereafter, without considering said objection, a notice came to be issued under section 142(1) of the Act, 1961 by the respondent-authority on 12.03.2022 calling for the certain information. 5.7 Thereafter, the respondent-authority has issued notice under section 148 dated 30.06.2021 to Neo structo Construction Private Limited for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 5.8 It is the case of the petitioner that impugned notice is issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue in Spice Enfotainment on 2 November 2017. The decision in Spice Enfotainment has been followed in the case of the respondent while dismissing the Special Leave Petition for AY 2011-2012. In doing so, this Court has relied on the decision in Spice Enfotainment. 8. He further placed reliance on the decision of this Court in case of Gayatri Microns Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2020] 114 Taxmann.com 318 in which this Court has held as under: 9. The controversy in the present petition, is no longer res integra. The Apex Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (supra), in paragraph 33, has categorically held that if the company has ceased to ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment year 2012-13, being without jurisdiction, is not sustainable. 9. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr.Manish Bhatt has opposed this petition. 10.We have heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. It is an undisputed fact that the Billfinger Neo Structo Pvt Ltd. was merged with Neo Structo Construction Pvt. Ltd by the order of the High Court of Bombay in Company Petition No. 21 of 2015 connected with Company Summons for Direction No. 875 of 2014. The petitioner has specifically raised his objection in the reply however, notice has been issued to the company viz. Billfinger Bilfinger Plant Equipment Pvt. Ltd which is already merged with the present petitioner. 11.We are in agreement with the submissions ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
