Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7|Page up and merged with another company by enclosing the copy of the High Court of Delhi. We further note from the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) that assessee has raised the issue of the assessee company non-existence at the time of issue of notice u/s. 153A on 6.8.2013 having been merged with BTL Holding Company Limited and assessee has argued that the assessment completed on a non-entity is void abinito. We further note that as per the Hon'ble High Court order, the assessee company has since been merged. We further note that the assessment order dated 30.3.2015 for AY 2013-14 in assessee's own case shows that the AO passed the order for AY 2013-14 admitting the fact of merger with effect from 01.9.2011 in view of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision dated 16.03.2012 regarding merger of the assessee company w.e.f. 01.9.2011. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the Revenue could not have assumed the jurisdiction to issue a notice in the name of a nonexistent entity. It emerged at the outset during the course of hearing that there arises the legal issue of validity of the impugned assessment by the AO on the ground that assessee company has since been merged with another company long back. Also the Revenue could hardly dispute the above clinching fact taken note by the lower authorities. Faced with this situation, we quote the case of PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki (2019) 416 ITR 613 to conclude that the impugned assessment is not sustainable in law in very terms since framed in the name of a non-existent entity. Following the ratio laid down in the case of PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., reported [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375/265 Taxman 515/416 ITR 613 (SC), the Assessment Order deserves to be quashed and set aside. We hold and direct