TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of learned CIT(Appeals) and the same is hereby affirmed. Grounds raised by the Revenue are rejected. - Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Accountant Member And Shri Kul Bharat, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, CA And Shri Lakshay Gupta, CA For the Department : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the Revenue, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi, dated 18.03.2020, pertaining to the assessment year 2009-10. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in quashing the order on technical ground of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f. 01.04.2013 vide order of the Hon ble Delhi High Court dated 06.08.2014. 3. On the contrary learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the synopsis. Learned counsel submitted that M/s Mangalam Infotech Pvt. Ltd. was incorporated on 11.05.2007. Thereafter, M/s Mangalam Infotech Pvt. Ltd. merged with M/s Core International Ltd. vide order of the Hon ble Delhi High Court dated 06.08.2014. Vide letter darted 30.09.2014 the assessee requested the ITO, Ward-6(2), New Delhi, for cancellation of PAN of M/s Mangalam Infotech Pvt. Ltd. on account of amalgamation and transfer of records to the then AO of M/s Core International Ltd. On 20.07.2015 name of M/s Core International Ltd. was changed to Vibhu International Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant company stood amalgamated, was correct in law to invoke jurisdiction on the amalgamating company i.e. the appellant. For appreciation of the issue, the date-wise sequence of events is necessary to be discussed in brief. The appellant i.e. M/s Mangalam Infotech Pvt. Ltd. was the amalgamating company and was amalgamated with M/s Core International Ltd., vide order of Hon ble Delhi High Court dated 06.08.2014. The appellant company vide its letter dated 30.09.2014 which was submitted to the ITO, Ward-6(2), New Delhi on 11.11.2014, the appellant had intimated the AO {then ITO, Ward-6(2) and now the ITO, Ward-16(2), New Delhi regarding amalgamation, to transfer all records of the appellant with the concerned AO of M/s Core International L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the company and transfer of their record with the assessing Officer of amalgamating company i.e. M/s Core International Ltd. Thereafter, it has been stated that the appellant had sent back the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 26.10.2016 issued for A.Y. 2009-10 to the AO in original (with envelope) for cancellation purposes. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the plea of the appellant, stated that notices issued u/s 148 and 142(1) of the Act were valid and within jurisdiction and proceeded to complete the assessment. The assessment order was passed in the name of M/s Vibhu international Limited (formerly known as M/s Core International Ltd.) w.e.f. 01.04.2013 in the ease of M/s Mangalam Infotcch Pvt. Ltd. mentioning PAN: AAFC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of Pr. CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, CA No. of 2019 dated 25.07.2019 has pronounced that despite the fact that the Assessing Officer was informed of the amalgamating company having ceased to exist as a result of the approved scheme of amalgamation, the jurisdictional notice was issued only in the name. the basis on which jurisdiction was invoked was fundamentally at odds with the legal principle that the amalgamating entity ceases to exist upon the approved scheme of amalgamation. Taking into consideration the above judicial pronouncements, ti is held that notice u/s 148 of the Act, issued to the appellant cannot be sustained in law and is accordingly quashed. Accordingly, the appellant gets relief on this ground. 16. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
