TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1193
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0,000 deducted under Section 194-IA. A subsequent notice under Section 148 was issued, but the assessee did not file its return of income. The AO noted that the assessee has neither filed its return nor submitted any reply and consequently, the AO treated the entire amount of Rs. 7,80,00,000/- as undisclosed receipts and added it to the total income of the assessee. 2.1 The relevant extract of the assessment order making the addition of Rs. 7,80,00,000/- is reproduced as below: "5. The facts and circumstances of the case have been considered. As per ROC, ShriMohd. Farhan is amongst one of the Directors of the assessee company. Further, in view of the pending proceedings, an appeal before the Hon'ble NCLT has been filed for revival of the assessee company. 5.1 During the course of proceedings, as the information and details were not forthcoming from the assessee, the same was called for u/s 133(6) of the Act from the two parties to whom the properties were sold. The information received from M/s Vishwas Electricals Pvt. Ltd. indicate that the property bearing No.B-41, Hosiery Complex, Noida has been sold on 24.07.2017 for a consideration of Rs. 3,90,00,000/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....serial No. 1 and 3 are allowed for statistical purpose. 7 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed." (emphasis supplied by us) 4. Aggrieved with the said order, the Revenue is in appeal before us on the following grounds of appeal: "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT.A has erred in holding that the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 and the assessment order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are invalid, solely on the ground that the assessee company was struck off by the Registrar of Companies. 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding reassessment proceedings invalid u/s 147/144 contrary to the ruling of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ravinder Kumar Aggarwal v. ITΟ 2023 451 ITR 100 Del. 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. 2019 107 taxmann.com 375 SC, which is distinguishable on facts, as the said case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....should be allowed to recover the demand against the assessee company for transaction occurring on F.Y. 2017-18, prior to the company getting struck off on 18.06.2018 i.e. in F.Y. 2018-19 relevant to A.Y. 2019- 20. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. AR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and relied upon certain case laws in support of its submission that since the assessee company was struck off, when the impugned notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 23.03.2022 and therefore, the consequent assessment proceedings resulting in the assessment order u/s 147/144 of the Act dated 31.03.2023 was invalid since it was carried out against a non-existence person. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. 7.1 The public notice for striking off the company is on page no. 15 of the Ld. CIT(A) of the order, which is reproduced as under: 7.2 The name of the assessee company appears at Sr. No. 16620 of in Annexure - 'A' as referred in the above order. 7.3 Both sides have relied upon the case laws in support of their respective contentions as to whether in this case, the notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2022 and the consequent assessment orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....961, read with sections 248, 250 and 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice (Struck off company) - Company was initially struck off by Ministry of Corporate Affairs on 30-6-2017 due to its default in filing its statutory return with ROC Notice under section 148 of Income-tax Act dated 28-3-2019 was issued to company Thereafter, name of company was restored by order passed by NCLT dated 25-9-2019-Petitioner, director of company, filed instant petition seeking quashing of impugned notice dated 28-3-2019 on ground that said notice was null and void, as it had been issued in name of struck off company Whether section 252(3) of Companies Act, 2013 expressly states that Tribunal's order directing restoration of a company will have effect of placing company in same position as if name of company had not been struck off from register of companies Held, yes Whether therefore, even on date of issuance of impugned notice, company would be deemed to be in existence Held, yes -Whether further, even section 250 of Companies Act, 2013 declares that, where a company is dissolved in consequence to it being struck off under section 248, it shall be deemed to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Sr. AR holding such a proceedings to be bad in law will be applicable. In the case of Chetan Chandrakant Kothari v. Income Tax Officer (supra) the company was struck off on 07.01.2011 and the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 29.03.2019 and the assessment order was passed on 01.12.2019. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under: "7. In view of the above averments made on oath by the respondent, more particularly, when it is stated on oath that the petition is found to be in-order that the assessee company has already been 'struck off before issuance of the notice under Section 148 of the Act, we therefore, quash and set aside the impugned assessment order dated 01.12.2019 passed by the respondent-Assessing Officer under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As the penalty proceedings are already stated to be have been dropped, no further order is required to be passed. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Notice is discharged." 7.8 Respectfully, following the aforesaid order, we hold that, we hold that in the case of assessee the notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2022 and the consequent assessment order dated 3....