2015 (3) TMI 1208

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... brought to our notice the additional ground raised, which reads as under:-  "1.That on the facts and circumstances of the case, assessment order framed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') is beyond jurisdiction, bad in law and void ab initio. 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer has erred in framing the assessment on a non-existent entity which was merged with Eicher Goodearth Ltd. w.e.f. 01.04.2005."   3. However, we find that the assessee had infact raised the said legal ground as an additional ground before the CIT(A) that the assessee company was non-existent on the date when the assessment order was passed, so the order against non-existent entit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....). On the other hand the ld DR contended that the said ground was not pressed before ld CIT(A) so based on the judgments cited supra she prayed that this ground may be rejected. 6. We have heard both the parties and have perused the records. This issue raised before us is no longer res-integra. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dimension Apparels Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.327/2014, ITA 328/2014, ITA 329/2014 , ITA 330/2014 and ITA 332/2014 dated 08.07.2014, concurring with the order of it's own Division Bench in Spice Entertainment Ltd. Vs. CIT, ITA No.475/2011, wherein the Hon'ble High Court held as follows:- "15. In Spice (supra), this Court, after discussing the law declared by the Supreme Court in Saraswati Industrial ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is fact to the knowledge of the AO. He, however, did not substitute the name of the appellant on record. Instead, the Assessing Officer made the assessment in the name of M/s Spice which was non existing entity on that day. In such proceedings and assessment order passed in the name of M/s Spice would clearly be void. Such a defect cannot be treated as procedural defect. Mere participation by the appellant would be of no effect as there is no estoppel against law." 16. The authority of the above precedent binds us; we see no reason to differ from the logic and reasoning in Spice (supra)." 7. In the instant case, also we find that the assessee, viz Eicher International Limited was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 09.03.1994. ....