Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Asia Pacific Systems Ltd ( Liquidated ... vs Asst Dit (It) 1(1), Mumbai on 11 August, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCHES "C", MUMBAI
Before Shri P K Bansal, Vice President &
Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member
ITA No.4778/Mum/2015 for Assessment Year 2005-06
The DCIT (IT) 1(1)(2) Asia Pacific Systems Ltd
Mumbai Republic of Mauritius
Vs.
PAN AALCA8378F
(Appellant) (Respondent)
ITA No.5696/Mum/2014 for Assessment Year 2005-06
Asia Pacific Systems Ltd The DCIT (IT) 1(1)(2)
Republic of Mauritius Mumbai
Vs.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
For the Revenue : Shri Rajat Mittal
For the Assessee : Shri Sunil Mahata
Date of Hearing : 10.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 11.08.2017
ORDER
Per P K Bansal, Vice-President:
These cross appeals have been filed against the order of the CIT(A)-55, Mumbai, dated 15.06.1015, for assessment year 2005-06.
2. At the outset, the assessee did not press for the appeal filed by him and requested for withdrawal of appeal. The learned DR did not object to the same. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee as withdrawn. 2
ITA No.4778 & 5696/Mum/2015 Asia Pacific Systems Ltd.
3. Now coming to the appeal filed by the Revenue, wherein it has raised as many as eight grounds of appeal. Ground nos. 7 & 8 are general in nature and, therefore, does not require any adjudication.
4. Ground nos. 1 to 4 relate to making of the assessment on a company, which is not in existence. The brief facts of the case are that the assessment in this case has been framed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144 vide order dated 20.05.2013, on an income of ` 40,64,230/-. The assessee went in appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee has agitated the action of the Assessing Officer in initiating reassessment proceedings and consequently completion of the proceedings on the assessee company, which has been liquidated and does not exist in the eyes of law. It was contended that the assessment so made was bad in law as the company had liquidated on 11.03.2009, while the notice u/s. 148, on the basis of which assessment has been framed by the Assessing Officer was issued on 29.03.2012, at the address of Loop Mobile Holdings India Ltd. The CIT(A) relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. vs. CIT 186 ITR 278, quashed the assessment and allowed the appeal of the assessee.
5. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully considered the same along with the orders of the tax authorities below. We noted, it is a fact that 3 ITA No.4778 & 5696/Mum/2015 Asia Pacific Systems Ltd.
assessment in this case was made on the assessee by issue of notice dated 29.03.2012. But, much before the date on initiation of the assessment proceedings, the assessee company had liquidated on 11.03.2009. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in holding that the assessment framed as null and void in the name of the company which had already liquidated. Our aforesaid view is duly supported by the following decisions:
• CIT vs. Vived Marketing Services Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 273/2009) (Delhi HC) • Impsat (P) Ltd vs. ITO (2005) (92 TTJ 552) (Delhi ITAT) • Pampasar Distillery Ltd vs. ACIT (2007) (15 SOT 331) (Kol ITAT) • Silicon Graphics System (I) Ltd., v. Department Of Income Tax (ITA.
No. 571 to 576/Del/2012 • Spice Entertainment Ltd (ITA No. 475 of 2011) (Delhi HC) • CIT vs. Kurban Hussain Ibrahimji Mithiborwala, (1971) 82 ITR 821 (SC) • SPN Milk Product Industries (P) Ltd (ITA No. 565/Del/2O12) (Delhi ITAT) No contrary decision was brought to our knowledge by the learned DR, even though he has vehemently relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. We, therefore, confirm the order of the CIT(A) and quash the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer.
4
ITA No.4778 & 5696/Mum/2015 Asia Pacific Systems Ltd.
6. Since the assessment made by the Assessing Officer has eventually been quashed by us, the other grounds taken by the Revenue does not require any adjudication.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11th day of August, 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Pawan Singh) (P K Bansal)
JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT
Mumbai; Dated:11th August, 2017
SA
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. The Appellant.
2. The Respondent.
3. The CIT(A),Mumbai
4. The CIT
5. DR, 'C' Bench, ITAT, Mumbai
BY ORDER,
#True Copy #
Assistant Registrar
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai