TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 329
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in quashing the order on technical ground of order being in the name of merged company. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was justified in not deciding the case on merits and thus deleting the addition of above application money of Rs. 11,75,51,436/- 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was correct in not appreciating the observation in case of Marshall Sons & Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. 233 ITR 809 (SC), companies and that if it is made in the name of an amalgamated company it should be set aside following the principal laid down in Kamlesh Kumar Mehta Vs. CIT(1977) 106 ITR 855 (Cal) and Roshan Lai, (1982) 134 ITR (Del). ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... On 20.07.2015 name of M/s Core International Ltd. was changed to Vibhu International Ltd. Subsequent to the filing of letter the AO issued notice dated 31.03.2016 u/s 148 in the case of M/s Mangalam Infotech Pvt. Ltd. bearing PANAAFCM7101G. During the course of assessment proceedings the assessee company challenged the issuance of notice. Learned counsel submitted that the learned CIT(A) has rightly quashed the assessment being illegal. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki [2019] 107 Taxmann.com 375 (SC). Learned counsel submitted that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd. [2022] 137 Taxmann.com 91 (SC) is distinguishab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ransfer all records of the appellant with the concerned AO of M/s Core International Ltd. and also requested for cancellation of PAN of the appellant. As mentioned in the pre paras, the ITO, Ward-16(2), New Delhi has confirmed vide letter dated 29.11.2019 addressed to the Director of M/s Vibhu International Ltd. that the letter dated 30.09.2014 with subject, intimation regarding amalgamation and request for cancellation of Permanent Account Number AAFCM7101G was received in the then ITO, Ward06(2) Delhi (now ITO, Ward-16(2), Delhi) office and its entry with entry number 608, dated 10.11.2014 is existing in the receipt register. Thereafter, the ITO, Ward 16(2) issued notice u/s 148 of the Act, to the appellant i.e. the amalgamating company: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f. 01.04.2013 in the ease of M/s Mangalam Infotcch Pvt. Ltd. mentioning PAN: AAFCM7101G, which is of the amalgamating company i.e. M/s Mangalam Infotcch Pvt. Ltd. on 29.12.2016. From the above, it is evident that the nonce n/s 148 of the Act, which, was issued on 31.03.2016 by the AO was later than the date of order of amalgamation of the appellant, which was the amalgamating company, vide order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court dated 06.08,20 I 4. The appellant had duly intimated the said change in status of the company vide its letter dated 30.09.2014 which was submitted in the office of the AO on 10.11.2014. The appellant vide its letter dated 20.12.2016 again requested the AO that the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act was without jurisdict....