Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.59 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii, New ... vs Dimension Apparels Pvt. Ltd. on 12 October, 2015

Asst Cit 8(2)(1), Mumbai vs Siemens Information Processing ... on 31 July, 2019

12. Even thereafter the Revenue has repeatedly brought the said issue before this Court in a large number of cases where, in more or less identical circumstances, the AO had passed the assessment order in the name of the entity that had ceased to exist as on the date of the assessment order. In many of these cases, as in the present case, the AO, after mentioning the name of the Amalgamating Company as the Assessee, mentioned below it the name of the Amalgamated Company. Illustratively the cases are: (i) CIT v Micra India (P) Ltd. (2015) 231 Taxman 809 (Del); (ii) CIT v. Micron Steels (P) Ltd. [2015] 372 ITR 386 (Del) (iii) CIT v. Dimensions Apparels (P) Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 288 (Del) (iv) BDR Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (Decision dated 26th July 2017 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2712 of 2016
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 68 - Cited by 40 - Full Document

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), ... vs Dcit, Circle- 2(2)(1), International ... on 7 February, 2022

4. ITAT, vide the impugned order, has held, that (z) since all material necessary for adjudication of the additional ground was available on record and no fresh examination of facts was required to be undertaken, the additional ground raised by the Respondent-Assessee was entitled to be admitted for adjudication; (ii) the Respondent-Assessee filed its return of income for the subject assessment years, in the name of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. (zzz) the name of the Respondent-Assessee, w.e.f. 18th April, 2012, was changed to Sony Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd.; (iv) Sony Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd., w.e.f. 1st April, 2013, was merged with Sony India Pvt. Ltd.; (v) the Appellant- Revenue, vide letter dated 6th December, 2013 was informed of the merger; (vz) the factum of merger was also mentioned in another letter dated 17th February, 2014 of the Respondent- Assessee to the Appellant-Revenue; (vzz) however 9 notwithstanding the aforesaid, the AO passed the draft assessment order dated 31st March, 2014, in the name of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd.; (viii) the Respondent-Assessee, in response to the department's allegation that no intimation about merger was made, wrote a letter dated 30th April, 2014; (ix) the DRP, in its order dated 21st October, 2014 mentioned the name of the Respondent- Assessee as "Sony Mobile Communications (India) Private Limited (now' merged with Sony India Private Ltd)".; (x) however the AO still passed the final assessment order under section 143(3)/144C in the name of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd.; (xz) thus, the final order was framed on a non-existent company and the question for adjudication was, whether the said defect was curable or made the final assessment order void; (x) in (a) Pr. CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2017] 85 taxmann.com 330 250 Taxman 409/397 IT R 681 (Delhi), (b) Spice Enfotainment Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 247 CTR 500 (Delhi), (c) CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P.)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bdr Builders And Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 9 January, 2017

6. In the present case, the Court notices that the impugned notice was issued against a non-existent entity i.e. M/s. Rishi Promoters which had ceased to exist by virtue of order of this Court dated 20.02.2013. The date of its amalgamation was in fact earlier. Apparently, the respondent-revenue was aware of this and despite that it proceeded to issue the impugned notice. The judgment in Spice Entertainment (supra) and Dimension Apparels (P) Limited (supra), though rendered after the final assessment was completed, are clear that such notice and proceedings emanating from it are unsustainable.
Delhi High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - S R Bhat - Full Document

Dcit, New Delhi vs M/S. Ndc Telecommunications India Pvt. ... on 16 October, 2018

7. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, filed a series of decisions and submitted that the re-assessment proceedings initiated against a dissolved company/non-existent company is void ab initio. Therefore, this being a covered matter in view of the various decisions including the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Spice Entertainment Ltd. vs. CIT 247 CTR 500 (Del) and CIT vs. Dimension Apparels Pvt. Ltd., 370 ITR 288 (Del), the ground raised by the 6 ITA No.3011/Del/2015 Revenue should be dismissed. The ld. DR, on the other hand, heavily relied on the order of the Assessing Officer.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 26 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Madhav Infra Projects Ltd (Erstwhile ... vs The Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad on 28 June, 2024

"Delay condoned. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the parties. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) [Spice Entertainment Ltd. v. Commr. of Service Tar, (2011 SCC OnLine Del), CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P) Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 288: CIT v. Chanakaya Exporta (P) Ltd., 2014 SCC OnLine Del 7678, CIT.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 48 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dcit, New Delhi vs M/S. Oxigen Infovision Pvt. Ltd., Delhi on 19 September, 2017

4. It is the argument of the Ld. DR that the Ld. CIT (A) ignored the fact that the notice u/s 143(2) was issued to assessee company on 23.09.2008 in the name of Oxigen Services India Pvt. Ltd. prior to the order dated 19.01.2009 of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and there was representation before the Department on behalf of the assessee on 27.11.2009. He further argued that the Ld.CIT (A) further ignored the fact that during the assessment proceedings the Authorized Representative of the assessee never objected the assessment proceedings in the name of M/s Oxigen Services India Pvt. Ltd. instead of success of M/s Oxigen Services India Pvt. Ltd. except intimating the fact of amalgamation of the companies. Per contra, it is the argument of the Ld. AR that with the order dated 19.01.2009 passed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court the assessee company ceased to exist and the said fact was brought to the notice of the AO by letter dated 27.11.2009 but in spite of the same the assessment order came to be passed on 29.12.2009 and such an order is non-est in the eye of law. He placed reliance on the decisions reported in Spice Infotainment Ltd. vs. CIT (2012) 247 CTR 500 (Del), CIT vs. Dimension Apparels P. Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 288 (Del), Rustagi Engineering Udyog P. 5 ITA No. 5718/Del/2014 & CO No. 166/Del/2015 Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2016) 382 ITR 443 (Del) and CIT vs. Micra India (P) Ltd. (2015) 231 Taxman 809 (Del).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1