Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Shakuntlam Softech Private Limited ... vs Income Tax Officer Ward 23(1) Delhi & Anr on 1 April, 2022

Author: Manmohan

Bench: Manmohan, Dinesh Kumar Sharma

                          $~50
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +      W.P.(C) 5475/2022 & CM APPLs.16294-16295/2022
                                 SHAKUNTLAM SOFTECH PRIVATE LIMITED (NOW
                                 AMALGAMATED WITH SHAKUNTLAM SECURITIES
                                 PRIVATE LIMITED)                            ..... Petitioner
                                               Through Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, Advocate.

                                                   versus

                                 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 23(1) DELHI & ANR.
                                                                        ..... Respondents
                                                   Through      Mr. Puneet Rai, Sr. Standing Counsel
                                                                with Mr. Karan Pandey, Advocate.


                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
                                         ORDER

% 01.04.2022 Present writ petition has been filed challenging the assessment order dated 4th March, 2022 as well as demand notice issued under Section 147 read with Section 144 as well as Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ['Act'] for the Assessment Year 2017-18 and all the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is void ab initio as it has been issued in the name of the Transferor company, which is a non-existent entity. He states that the Petitioner had served the amalgamation application as well as a copy of the interim order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to the Respondent No.1 so the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KRISHNA BHOJ Signing Date:02.04.2022 18:27:00 Revenue Department was aware of the amalgamation proceedings that had been initiated before the NCLT. He states that despite being aware of the amalgamation proceedings, the reassessment proceedings were initiated and reassessment order has been passed against a non-existing entity.

He relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, (2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC), wherein it has been held that the issuance of a notice to the non- existing company is a substantive illegality and not a procedural violation.

Issue notice.

Mr. Puneet Rai, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He prays for and is permitted to file a counter affidavit within six weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.

List on 7th September, 2022.

Till further orders, there shall be stay of the order dated 4th March, 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act.

MANMOHAN, J DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J APRIL 1, 2022 AS Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KRISHNA BHOJ Signing Date:02.04.2022 18:27:00