TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1898
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT Act as per the directions of DRP. 2. The assessee has raised additional grounds which are as under. " Appeal Memorandum in Form 36B: Ground No. XVI Concise Grounds: Ground No. 30 The learned Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in passing the Assessment Order in the name of "Aztecsoft Ltd.," though the said entity was not in existence as on the date of passing of the assessment order i.e., 16.10.2012. He has failed to appreciate that passing an assessment order on a non-existent entity is void and an incurable defect in the eyes of law. Appeal Memorandum in Form 36B: Ground No. XVII Concise Grounds: Ground No. 31 Without prejudice to above, the Learned Assessing Officer is not justifie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is now merged with Mindtree Ltd. and therefore, this is apparent that the fact of merger is very much in the knowledge of AO. He submitted that under these facts, the assessment order is bad in law and it should be quashed and in support of his contention, he placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Principal CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. which is successor of M/s. Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd. as reported in 397 ITR 681 (Delhi). He also submitted copy of a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Spice Enfotainment Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 285 of 2014 dated 02.11.2017 and placed reliance on it. He submitted that the SLP filed by the revenue was dismissed. He also subm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mind Tree Ltd and not of erstwhile entity M/s Aztechsoft Ltd. It means that the event of merger of assessee company has been duly taken into account while passing the assessment order. Further, the first paragraph of the final assessment order is quoted below. "Aztechsoft Limited (Aztech for short), incorporated in 1995, now merged with Mindtree Limited is the principal holding company of AztechDishaInc and Aztech US." It can be seen from the above that the assessment order is indeed passed in the name of successor company wherein the Name, address have been correctly mentioned. 4. It is observed that the assessee company filed its return of income on 29.09.2008 in the name M/s Aztech Soft Ltd. for A.Y. 2008-09 wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (successor entity). Copy of notice u/s 142(1) dated 14.12.2011 is enclosed as one such reference (enclosure-3). It is also seen that all the subsequent notices and orders such as draft assessment order, DRP order, Final assessment order have been passed in the name of M/s Aztech Soft Limited (now merged with Mindtree Limited) and addressed to registered address of Mindtree Limited (successor entity). The assessee has also filed responses in the same manner. One such reply of assessee dated 16/01/2012 is enclosed (Enclosure-4) for ready reference. Even the power of attorney filed by the assessee before the assessing officer mentions the details as M/s Aztech Soft Limited (now merged with Mindtree Limited) (enclosure-5). Therefore, the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the conversion of Trishul Developers the partnership firm as as limited company by name TBIPL took place on 1.2.2010. Therefore, for A.Ys 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2007-08, only Trishul Developers will have to be assessed. The provisions of s.170(2) cannot be involved for the simple reason that the erstwhile firm filed the return of income and was very much available. S. 170(2) is attracted only in a case where the predecessor "cannot be found". In our opinion, the CIT(A) has rightly rejected the contentions in this regard put forth by the assessee." 10. It is submitted that the decisions of Hon'ble High Court in the case of Intel technology[2015] 57 taxmann.com 159and Hon'ble ITAT decision in the case of M/s. GE Medical Sys....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uzuki India Ltd.) as noted by Hon'ble Delhi High court in the cited judgment. Hence, it is seen that in that case also, facts are same and still the issue was decided in favour of the assessee by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in that case by following another judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High court rendered in the case of Spice Infotainment Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in 247 CTR 500 (Delhi). This judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Spice Infotainment Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) has already been confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Hence in the present case also, we hold by respectfully following these judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court that the assessment order framed in the present case in the name of amalgamating company is bad....