TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 1030
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....013 passed by the CIT(Appeals)-IV, Bangalore, in relation to Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. The Assessee has filed an application dated 27.01.2020 for admission of the following additional ground of appeal:- "That since order of assessment dated 29.12.2006 in the name of M/s. i2 Technologies Software Pvt. Ltd. u/s. 143(3) of the Act is in the name of non existent entity therefore the same is without jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed as such." 3. It is the plea of the assessee that the assessment order dated 29.12.2006 passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] being passed in the name of i2 Technologies Software (P) Ltd., an entity which was not in existence on the date of passing the above mentioned....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y to adjudicate the additional ground is already available on record and hence the additional ground should be admitted in the interest of justice. 4. The learned counsel for the Assessee while reiterating plea as set forth in the application for admission of additional ground has further placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements in support of the plea for admission of additional ground. • CIT vs. S. Nelliappan [66 ITR 722 (SC)] wherein it was held that Tribunal may give leave to the assessee to urge grounds not set forth in the memorandum of appeal, and in deciding the appeal the Tribunal is not restricted to the grounds set forth in the memorandum of appeal or taken by leave of the Tribunal. • A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cation as the facts for adjudication of additional grounds of appeal are already available on record. The judicial precedents cited by the learned counsel for the Assessee supports the plea of the Assessee for admission of additional ground of appeal. We therefore admit the additional ground for adjudication. 6. 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. 7. We shall take up for consideration the Additional Ground admitted for adjudication since in the said ground the issue raised is regarding the validity of an assessment in the name of a company that has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y ceasing to exist, would not invalidate the assessment proceedings as the same was not a jurisdictional error but an irregularity and procedural / technical lapse which could be cured under section 292B of the Act. 10. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The issue that arises for consideration is as to, whether assessment order passed by the AO against non-existent company is sustainable in the eyes of law? 11. As per the Scheme of Arrangement which was approved by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, i2 Technologies Software Pvt. Ltd. ceased to exist as a company on its dissolution without winding up prior to 29.12.2006 when the order of assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was passed by the AO. 12. The following char....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....¢ On October 14, 2016, DRP gave its directions to the AO on the objections to the draft assessment order of the AO. • On October 31, 2016, the AO passed the final order in the name of SPIL (amalgamated with MSIL). • The Tribunal by its order dated April 6, 2017, held that the assessment order was invalid on the ground that it was void ab initio having been passed in the name of a non-existent entity by the TO. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal. The Assessee filed appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. • The Assessee filed return of income on 22.06.2005 in the name of M/s i2 Technologies Software Pvt. Ltd. • On 22.06.2005, i2 Technologies Software Pvt. Ltd. ....