Reassessment proceedings under sections 147/148 invalid against dissolved company lacking legal existence

ITAT Surat held that reassessment proceedings under sections 147/148 against a dissolved company were invalid. The company had converted to LLP and lost its legal existence, as confirmed by MCA records showing dissolved status. The tribunal ruled that notices for reopening assessment against a non-existing entity are invalid, and a dissolved company cannot be treated as a "person" under section 2(31) of the Act. The reassessment order under section 147 was quashed as being without jurisdiction, and the consequential order under section 144 read with section 147 was set aside. Decision favored the assessee.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of re-opening assessment u/s 147 by issuing notice u/s 148 to a deceased person (non-existing company).
2. Non-issuance of notice u/s 143(2).
3. Addition of Rs. 40,00,000/- on account of share application money u/s 68.
4. Addition of Rs. 60,000/- being commission expense u/s 69C.
5. Addition of Rs. 1,89,078/- on account of undisclosed interest income.

Summary:

1. Validity of Re-opening Assessment u/s 147 by Issuing Notice u/s 148 to a Deceased Person:
The appellant argued that the notice u/s 148 was issued to a non-existing company, which had been converted into an LLP on 14.02.2015. The Tribunal noted that the notice was issued nearly three years after the conversion, making it invalid. The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., which held that an assessment order passed in the name of a non-existing entity is without jurisdiction and must be set aside. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the notice issued u/s 147 and the resultant order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147.

2. Non-issuance of Notice u/s 143(2):
The appellant contended that the assessment was liable to be quashed due to the non-issuance of notice u/s 143(2). However, since the primary issue of jurisdiction was decided in favor of the appellant, this issue became academic and did not require further adjudication.

3. Addition of Rs. 40,00,000/- on Account of Share Application Money u/s 68:
The Tribunal did not delve into the merits of this addition, as the primary issue of jurisdiction was resolved in favor of the appellant, rendering other issues academic.

4. Addition of Rs. 60,000/- Being Commission Expense u/s 69C:
Similar to the previous issue, the Tribunal did not address this addition due to the resolution of the primary jurisdictional issue.

5. Addition of Rs. 1,89,078/- on Account of Undisclosed Interest Income:
This issue was also not adjudicated upon, as the primary jurisdictional issue was decided in favor of the appellant.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal quashed the notice issued u/s 147 and the resultant order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147, as the notice was issued to a non-existing entity. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and other issues became academic and did not require adjudication. The order was pronounced on 06/06/2024 in the open court.

---