Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. The appellant company submits that the order passed by the learned TPO u/s. 92CA(3) dated 29.10.2023 is bad in law since the same has been passed in the name of Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd. which has been amalgamated into Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd.

and accordingly, as the said order has been passed in the name of an nonexistent entity, the order passed by the learned TPO and the consequential final assessment order be declared null and void.

Ld.AR invited our attention to page 2 to 157 of the paper book.

Ld.AR therefore, pleaded that the order passed by TPO is bad in law.

Ld.AR invited our attention to the order passed by the ITAT in assessee's own case for A.Y.2020-21 wherein, identical issue has been decided by the ITAT in assessee's own case.

2.1 Written submission filed by the Assessee is as under :

"1] In this case, the assessee has raised Ground No. 3 which reads as under "The appellant company submits that the order passed by the learned TΡΟ 92CA(3) dated 23. 10. 2023 is bad in law since the same has been passed in the name of Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd. which has been amalgamated into Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd. and accordingly, as the said order has been passed in the name of an nonexistent entity, the order passed by the learned TPO and the consequential final asst order be declared null and void"
"4. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee challenged the validity of order passed by DRP on the ground that the TPO had passed order on a non-existent entity. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that All scripts India Private Limited (AIPL) was a Private Limited company incorporated in 1988. During Financial Year 2016-17 relevant to assessment year 2017-18, AIPL was converted into Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) on 21 March 2017. The assessee had brought this fact to the notice of the Ld. Assessing Officer (ACIT Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara) vide letter dated 12 August 2019 in response to notice issued u/s142(1) of the Act. Further to the above, again in submission filed by the assessee before the DCIT Transfer Pricing-1, Vadodara, the assessee intimated the fact that AIPL had been converted into a LLP. However, despite the aforesaid intimations to the Ld. Assessing Officer and the TPO, the Transfer Pricing Order was passed u/s 92CA(3) of the Act by the TPO in the name of AIPL- which was a nonexistent entity. Further, the assessee filed submission dated 31 March 2021 before the NEAC, Delhi i.e. the Assessing Officer intimating the fact of conversion of AIPL into LLP. However, the Ld. Assessing Officer passed draft assessment order in the name of AIPL, which is a non-existent entity. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on several judicial in support of the contention that once the order passed by TPO and draft assessment order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer have been passed in the name of a non- existent entity, then the subsequent orders passed by DRP and final assessment order are also bad in law. Accordingly, the issue may be adjudicated in favour of the assessee on this ground of jurisdiction alone.
6. Now in the instant facts, we observe that the assessee had filed a formal intimation before the DCIT, Transfer Pricing on 11 September 2019 intimating that AIPL has been converted into LLP w.e.f. 21 March 2017 (copy of the same has been placed on record for our perusal). Further, the assessee had also filed letter dated 12 August 2019 before the ACIT, Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara intimating him about the conversion of AIPL into LLP (copy of the letter has been placed on record for our perusal). Therefore, we observe that the fact of conversion of AIPL into LLP was intimated to both the Ld. Assessing Officer and the TPO much before passing of their respective orders, yet both the TPO and the Ld. Assessing Officer passed the Transfer Pricing Order and the draft assessment order in the name of a nonexistent entity. In our view, the view of the Courts and Tribunals on this issue is unanimous that once the draft assessment order and Transfer pricing order itself are bad in law, having been passed in the name of a non-existententity, then the final assessment order based on the above orders is void ab initio as well. In view of the above settled position of law, we are of the view that the final assessment order sought to be appeal against is void and hence liable to be set aside.