TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 531
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing disposed off by way of consolidated order for the sake of brevity. 2. Appellants, M/s. Artsy Infrastructure and Projects Private Limited (now merged with Vatsal Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. ATJ Impex Pvt. Ltd. (now merged with TTJ Impex Pvt. Ltd.) by filing the present appeals sought to set aside the impugned orders both dated 03.04.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi qua the assessment year 2009-10 on the identical grounds except for figure of additions made u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') inter alia that :- "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)] is bad both in the eye of law and on f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....application of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming additions (amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- and Rs. 40,00,000 in case of M/s. Artsy Infrastructure and Projects Private Limited and M/s. ATJ Impex Pvt. Ltd. respectively) made by AO on account of share capital under Section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credits. 7. That the said addition has been confirmed rejecting the detailed explanation and evidences brought on record by the assessee to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the shareholders as well as genuineness of the transaction. 8. (i) That the abovesaid addition has been confirmed despite having bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e books of account of the assessee under the head 'share capital' and 'share premium' by way of receiving share application and share premium money, remained unexplained money having been pumped into its business in the garb of fresh share capital and share premium. 3. Assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT (A) by way of filing the appeals who has dismissed both the appeals by confirming the addition. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeals. 4. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rdinate Bench of the Tribunal in Nirvana Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd. (now merged with TTJ Impex Ltd.) in ITA No.4793/Del/2017 order dated 09.03.2018, Rudraksha Agencies Company Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 21 (2), new Delhi 2018 (5) TMI 740 - ITAT Delhi & DCIT, Circle 18 (1), New Delhi vs. NDC Telecommunications India Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (10) TMI 1119 - ITAT Delhi. 7. Undisputedly, M/s. Artsy Infrastructure and Projects Private Limited merged was with Vatsal Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 25.05.2014 and M/s. ATJ Impex Pvt. Ltd. was merged with TTJ Impex Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 26.05.2014 passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Company Petition No.645 of 2013 connected with Company Application No.(M) 157 of 2013 w.e.f. 01.04.2013. It is also not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re cannot be any assessment against a dead person." 9. Aforesaid decision has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 02.11.2017 passed in Civil Appeal No.285-286opf -2014. 10. Similarly, Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Pr.CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (supra) also quashed the assessment framed on amalgamating company by returning following findings :- "33 In the present case, despite the fact that the assessing officer was informed of the amalgamating company having ceased to exist as a result of the approved scheme of amalgamation, the jurisdictional notice was issued only in its name. The basis on which jurisdiction was invoked was fundamentally at odds with the legal principle that the amalgamating entity ceases ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... DR for the Revenue contended that notice of merger alleged to be issued by the assessee to the ITO in case of M/s. Artsy Infrastructure and Projects Private Limited has never been served upon the jurisdictional ITO as the jurisdiction was transferred from ITO, Ward No.3(2), New Delhi. He has also contended that even letters of intimation by the assessee in both the cases bear no signature and no diary number of the Revenue department. We are of the considered view that when factum of merger by virtue of the orders dated 25.05.2014 and 26.05.2014 passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court was in the public domain and the notice of intimation of merger was given by the assessee in case of M/s. TTJ Impex Pvt. Ltd. to the jurisdictional ITO, the ....