TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 580
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that since ground No.3 of the assessee's appeal is with regard to validity of the issue of notice under Section 148, it should be decided first and thereafter only, the grounds raised either by the assessee or by the Revenue with regard to various additions deleted/sustained by the learned CIT(A) should be considered. Learned DR has no objection to the above request of the assessee's counsel. Accordingly, we proceed to decide ground No.3 of the assessee's appeal which reads as under:- "Without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have held that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the consequent assessment in the name of the erstwhile firm is bad in law, vo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he lower authorities. She stated that in the year under consideration, the assessee filed the return declaring income of `41,31,220/- on 29th December, 2006. The return was filed in the name of partnership firm and not in the name of the successor company. That in response to notice under Section 148 also, the assessee never pointed out that the firm is not in existence but only stated that the return filed originally should be treated as return of income in response to the notice under Section 148. That the assessee never intimated to the Revenue with regard to dissolution of the firm and its conversion into the company. Therefore, the assessee misguided the Department. That simply mentioning in the letter head as successor to DLF Cyber Ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant material placed before us. The facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 148 on 18th August, 2008 in the name of M/s DLF Cyber City (through partner). Therefore, it is undisputed that the notice was issued to the partnership firm. It is also undisputed that the partnership firm ceased to exist from 2nd March, 2006 after its conversion into company under Chapter IX of the Companies Act. For the AY 2006-07, the firm has prepared the accounts for the period 1.4.2005 to 1.3.2006 and also filed the return for the above period. The Revenue has also completed the assessment on the basis of the said return. We also find that the assessee has not separately intimated about the conversion of the firm into ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the assessment in the hands of M/s Spice Corporation Ltd. which is a non-entity is not valid because the company stood dissolved consequent upon its amalgamation with M Corp Global (P) Ltd. with effect from 1st July, 2003. The CIT(A) rejected this ground and the assessee was in appeal before the ITAT, Delhi Bench. The ITAT, Delhi Bench restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with the following finding:- "14. In the light of the discussion s made above, we, therefore, hold that the assessment made by the AO, in substance and effect, is not against the non-existent amalgamating company. However, we do agree with the proposition or ratio decided in the various cases relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....MC Ltd. It was the result of the scheme of the amalgamation filed before the Company Judge of this Court which was duly sanctioned vide orders dt. 11th Feb., 2004. With this amalgamation made effective from 1st July, 2003, S ceased to exist. That is the plain and simple effect in law. The scheme of amalgamation itself provided for this consequence, inasmuch as simultaneous with the sanctioning of the scheme, S was also stood dissolved by specific order of this Court. With the dissolution of this company, its name was struck off from the rolls of companies maintained by the RoC. A company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act is a juristic person. It takes its birth and gets life with the incorporation. It dies with the dissolution as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mstances, it would be incumbent upon the AO to first substitute the name of the appellant in place of M/s Spice and then issue notice to the appellant. However, such a course of action can be taken by the AO only if it is still permissible as per law and has not become time-barred." 13. In our opinion, the ratio of the above decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court would be squarely applicable to the case of the assessee. It is a settled law that the partnership firm and the company are separate juridical persons. Under the Income-tax Act also, they are assessed separately. Chapter IX of the Companies Act permits the conversion of the partnership firm into company and, on such conversion, the partnership firm ceases to exist and t....