Assessment orders invalidated due to non-existent entity post-amalgamation. Assessee's appeals allowed.

The Tribunal deemed the assessment orders invalid as they were based on a non-existent entity resulting from the amalgamation of the assessee company. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed all six appeals filed by the Assessee, rendering the other grounds of appeal moot.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of proceedings initiated under section 153C.
2. Issuance of notice under section 153C and consequent assessment order.
3. Assessment on a non-existent company due to amalgamation.
4. Use of statements against the assessee without cross-examination.
5. Rejection of audited books and transactions through banks.
6. Incorrect and excessive charging of interest under sections 234A and 234B.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Legality of Proceedings Initiated Under Section 153C:
The Assessee contended that the proceedings initiated under section 153C were illegal, bad in law, and without jurisdiction. The Tribunal noted that the assessee company had already amalgamated with another company before the finalization of the assessment. Therefore, any assessment framed on a non-existent entity was considered a nullity. The Tribunal referenced multiple cases, including ACIT vs. Micra India Pvt. Ltd., to support this position, emphasizing that an assessment upon a dissolved company is impermissible as there is no provision in the Income Tax Act to make such an assessment.

2. Issuance of Notice Under Section 153C and Consequent Assessment Order:
The Tribunal observed that the notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee company after it had already amalgamated and ceased to exist. The Tribunal cited the case of CIT vs. Vivid Marketing Servicing Pvt. Ltd., where it was held that an assessment order against a company that had been dissolved was invalid. The Tribunal concluded that the assessment order in the present case was similarly invalid.

3. Assessment on a Non-Existent Company Due to Amalgamation:
The Tribunal highlighted that the assessee had informed the Department about the amalgamation with JPL Hotels and Residences Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal reiterated that a company, once dissolved through amalgamation, ceases to exist, and any assessment on such a non-existent entity is invalid. The Tribunal referenced the case of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. vs. CIT, where it was established that assessment upon a dissolved company is impermissible.

4. Use of Statements Against the Assessee Without Cross-Examination:
The Assessee argued that the AO used statements of various persons against the assessee without providing an opportunity for cross-examination. The Tribunal did not delve deeply into this issue, as the primary ground for allowing the appeal was the invalidity of the assessment on a non-existent entity.

5. Rejection of Audited Books and Transactions Through Banks:
The Tribunal noted that the AO had rejected the audited books and transactions through banks, considering them artificial and not reflective of actual business transactions. However, the Tribunal focused on the primary issue of the invalidity of the assessment due to the non-existence of the assessee company post-amalgamation.

6. Incorrect and Excessive Charging of Interest Under Sections 234A and 234B:
The Assessee contended that interest was wrongly charged under sections 234A and 234B. The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue, as the assessment itself was deemed invalid.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the assessment orders were invalid as they were framed on a non-existent entity due to the amalgamation of the assessee company. The Tribunal allowed all six appeals filed by the Assessee, rendering the other grounds of appeal infructuous. The order was pronounced in the Open Court on 11/4/2014.

---