Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

e) Letter dated 5 th April, 2013 filed in the office of CIT-II, New Delhi on 8 th April, 2013;"

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

6. It was further submitted that since the erstwhile entity dissolved and ceased to exist as a legal entity in the eyes of law from 17.03.2013 i.e. the date on which the amalgamation was taken on record by the Registrar of Companies, no proceedings can be initiated/continued in the name of non- existent entity, viz. M/s Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd. on or after the said date. It was pointed out that this fact that M/s Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd. stood amalgamated, was within the knowledge of the AO/Revenue authorities. In spite of the said fact following notices were issued in the name of the non-existent entity i.e. M/s Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd.:

the successor entity after the name of the erstwhile/non- existent assessee did not and could not validate the invalid assessment proceedings, continued in the name of the non- existent entity, without issuing formal notices and bringing on record that the successor is an amalgamated entity. It was also pointed out that the Income tax computation form dated 29.12.2015 and the notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 29.12.2015 was also in the name of non-existent entity, therefore, it was illegal and bad in law which was liable to be quashed. The reliance was placed on the following case laws:

AO in spite of knowing this fact that M/s Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd. amalgamated with M/s Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., made the reference to the TPO and also issued the notice dated 07.11.2014 to the non-existent entity i.e. M/s Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd.

11. On a similar issue the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Micra India (P.) Ltd. (2015) 57 Taxmann.com 163 held as under:

"In the instant case, no doubt there was participation during the course of assessment; however, the Assessing Officer, despite being told that the original company was no longer in existence, did not take remedial measures and did not transpose the transferee as the company which had to be assessed, instead, he resorted to a peculiar procedure of describing the original assessee as the one in existence; the order also mentioned the transferee's name below that of assessee's company. Now, that did not lead to the assessment being completed in the name of the transferee-company. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee-company was still in existence. Clearly, this was a case where the assessment was contrary to law, as having being completed against a non-existent company. The Tribunal's decision is, in the circumstances, justified and warranted."

It has been further held as under:

"Once it is found that assessment is framed in the name of non-existing entity, it does not remain a procedural irregularity of the nature which could be cured by invoking the provisions of Section 292B. The framing of assessment against a non-existing entity/person goes to the root of the matter which is not a procedural irregularity but a jurisdictional defect as there cannot be any assessment against a 'dead person'."

13. In the present case also as the assessment was framed in the name of non-existing entity i.e. M/s Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd. which amalgamated with M/s Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. and this irregularity was not curable. Therefore, the assessment order passed by the AO in the name of non- existing entity was void ab initio and deserves to be quashed, we order accordingly.