Court sets aside assessment order for lack of opportunity, remands for fresh adjudication.

The court set aside the assessment order due to the petitioner not being given an opportunity to respond within the stipulated time, violating natural justice principles. The matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, with the petitioner directed to file a response within two weeks. The court found that even if the respondent's arguments were accepted, the assessment order would still be set aside. The writ petition and applications were disposed of, allowing for further proceedings with all parties' rights and contentions remaining open.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to reassessment notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2015-16 and challenge to assessment order passed under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Act based on the entity's merger, violation of natural justice, and compliance date discrepancy.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the reassessment notice and the assessment order on the grounds that they were issued in the name of a non-existing entity, which had merged with the petitioner company. Citing the decision in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, it was argued that issuing a notice to a non-existing company is a substantive illegality. The income alleged to have escaped assessment had already been offered for tax by the amalgamated entity in a previous assessment order.

The petitioner further contended that the assessment order was issued in violation of the principles of natural justice as they were not given an opportunity to be heard. Additionally, a discrepancy was highlighted regarding the compliance date set prior to the issuance of the notice. The court acknowledged these arguments and held that the assessment order was liable to be set aside due to the petitioner not having an opportunity to respond to the show cause notice within the stipulated time.

The respondent accepted the notice and argued that the assessment order was passed in the name of the amalgamated entity. They suggested that the issue of whether income had escaped assessment could be addressed in appeal proceedings. However, the court found that even if the respondent's submission was accepted, the assessment order would still be set aside for violating the principle of natural justice.

Consequently, the court set aside the impugned assessment order and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The petitioner was directed to file a response to the show cause notice within two weeks, and the Assessing Officer was instructed to decide the matter after a hearing, in accordance with the law.

In conclusion, the writ petition and applications were disposed of, leaving the rights and contentions of all parties open for further proceedings.

---