TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1379
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lised income from commission on Government transactions. 3. That without prejudice to ground no. 1 above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and provisions of the law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 1,19,51,594/- towards prior period expenses. 4. That without prejudice to ground no. 1 above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and provisions of the law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 12,964/- towards interest u/s 201(1A) or 206C(7) of the Act. 5. The appellant may be allowed to add, amend and forego any of the ground at the time of hearing." 3. In addition to the above, the assessee has raised the following additional ground of appeal: "That, on the facts & circumstances of the case and provisions of the law, order passed u/s 143(3) dated 26.08.2021 by the Ld. Assessing officer (AO) and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, being passed in the name of non-existence assessee, is void ab initio and therefore, the same needs to be quashed." 4. We have gone through the additional ground. We are of the considered view that the ground goes to the root of the matter, therefore, we admit the sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....26.08.2021 in the name of United bank of India which was not in existence on 26.08.2021 at all. The ld AR submitted that this issue stands settled by various Courts of the Law And relied on the following decisions: i) PCIT Vs, Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (2019) 107 Taxmann.com 375(SC). ii) Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd vs CIT (1990) 186 ITR 278 (SC) iii) Spice Infotainment Ltd vs CIT (2011) 247 CTR 500(Del) which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated November 2,2017 in CA No. 285 of 2014 iv) CIT Vs. Micra India Pvt Ltd (2015) 231 Taxmann 809(Del) v) CIT vs Dimensions Apparels Pvt Ltd (2015) 370 ITR 288(Del) vi) PCIT-6 New Delhi Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (2017) 85 taxmann.com 330(Del) vii) Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCT, Central-2 vs. BMA Capfin Ltd (2018) 100 Taxmann.com (Delhi). The revenue further filed SLP and the same also stands dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP no 40486/2018 (2018) 100 taxmann.com 330(SC) In view of the above, the ld AR argued that the order u/s 143(3) passed by the ld AO in the name of non-existence assessee i.e United bank of India be declared as void ab intio and be quashed. 9. O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ette Notification no CG-DI-E-04032020-216535 dated 04.03.2020. The amalgamated entity PNB duly intimated the Addl.CIT, Special Range, New Delhi the fact of amalgamation of the United Bank of India with Punjab National Bank (PNB) vide mail dated 27.04.2020. This position was also reiterated in the written reply filed on 03.03.2021 with NFAC, Delhi, during the assessment proceedings for the instant year, as submissions were made on the letter head of PNB and the name of e-United Bank of India was mentioned in the subject itself. 12. We also find that the Revenue itself acknowledged the fact of amalgamation during the assessment proceedings for AY 2012-13 when ld JAO issued notice dated 30.03.2021 to PNB after duly noting the facts of aforesaid amalgamation in his assessment order for AY 2012-13. We further find that the NFAC Delhi issued a notice dated 06.08.2021 to PNB, during assessment proceedings for AY 2012-13, duly noting the fact of aforesaid amalgamation. We note that the Revenue was very well aware of the facts of amalgamation before passing the assessment order dated 26.08.2021 for AY 2018-19 in the name of non-existence assessee i.e., United bank of India. It is interesti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) as juxtaposed to the decision of Mahagun (supra), where the assessee has failed to disclose that it has ceased to exist in the eyes of law, the hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of International Hospital Ltd V DCIT in ITA 116/2023 vide order dated 26.09.2024 has laid the controversy at rest. The Delhi High Court held as under: 29. As is apparent from the aforesaid extracts, what appears to have weighed upon the Supreme Court in Mahagun Realtors was a deliberate attempt on the part of the successor assessee to misrepresent and perhaps an evident failure to make a candid and full disclosure of material facts. The Court in Mahagun Realtors noticed that even though the factum of amalgamation was known to the assessee, it failed to make appropriate disclosures either at the time of search or in the statements which came to be recorded in connection therewith. Even the Return of Income which came to be filed had suppressed the factum of amalgamation. It also bore in consideration that the Return itself was submitted in the name of the amalgamating entity. It was that very entity in whose name further appeals came to be instituted. It was in the aforesaid backdrop that the Supreme ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bearing in mind the peculiar facts of that case including the conduct of the assessee therein. It was those facets which appear to have weighed upon the Supreme Court to hold against the assessee. 32. In view of the aforesaid, the position in law appears to be well- settled that a notice or proceedings drawn against a dissolved company or one which no longer exists in law would invalidate proceedings beyond repair. Maruti Suzuki conclusively answers this aspect and leaves us in no doubt that the initiation or continuance of proceedings after a company has merged pursuant to a Scheme of Arrangement and ultimately comes to be dissolved, would not sustain. 33. We note that in this batch of writ petitions and in light of the disclosures which have been made, the assessee's clearly appear to have apprised their respective AOs of the factum of amalgamation and merger at the first available instance. If the respondents chose to ignore or acknowledge those fundamental changes, they would have to bear the consequences which would follow. Once the Scheme came to be approved, the transferor companies came to be dissolved by operation of law. They, thus, ceased to exist in the eyes of law.....