TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 558
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een merged with the Bharat Serums and Vaccines Ltd vide order dated 02.08.2018 and hence the said order passed u/s 143(3) on 20.12.2018 on non-existent company is bad in law. 2. Under the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 1,24,70,220/- u/s 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.1 Under the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming addition without giving appellant adequate and reasonable opportunity to make submission. 3. The appellant leaves to add, alter or amend any of the above ground of appeal. 3. The assessee has also filed an application dated 07.05.2026 seeking admission of the following additional ground: Under the Facts and in law, the order passed u/s 143(3) is bad in law as much as the learned A.O. failed to appreciate the fact that Kasiak Research Private Ltd has been merged with the Bharat Serums and Vaccines Ltd vide order dated 02.08.2018 and hence the said order passed u/s 143(3) on 20.12.2018 on non-existent company is bad in law. Facts of the Case 4. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2016-17 declaring ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....National Company Law Tribunal in C.P. (CAA)/2106/MB/2018 dated 02.08.2018. He submitted that despite the amalgamation having attained finality, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order under section 143(3) on 20.12.2018 in the name of Kasiak Research Private Limited, which had ceased to exist. 10. The learned AR further invited our attention to the Statement of Facts filed before the learned CIT(A), wherein the assessee had specifically disclosed as under: "The Appeal is for the order passed in the name of the Appellant Company, which is amalgamated with Bharat Serums and Vaccines Limited pursuant to the order passed by the NCLT vide order no. C.P. (CAA)/2106/MB/2018 dated August 2, 2018. The merger is dated April 01, 2017." 11. It was submitted that despite the aforesaid specific disclosure, the learned CIT(A) also proceeded to pass the appellate order in the name of Kasiak Research Private Limited, which was a non-existent entity. 12. In support of admission of the additional ground, reliance was placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (229 ITR 383) and CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Socie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... authorities is to assess correctly the tax liability of an assessee in accordance with law. If, for example, as a result of a judicial decision given while the appeal is pending before the Tribunal, it is found that a non-taxable item is taxed or a permissible deduction is denied, there is no reason why the assessee should be prevented from raising that question before the Tribunal for the first time, so long as the relevant facts are on record in respect of that item." (para 5) "The view that the Tribunal is confined only to issues arising out of the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) takes too narrow a view of the powers of the Tribunal... where the Tribunal is only required to consider a question of law arising from the facts which are on record in the assessment proceedings there is no reason why such a question should not be allowed to be raised..." (para 7) "The Tribunal has, therefore, jurisdiction to examine a question of law which arises from the facts as found by the authorities below and having a bearing on the tax liability of the assessee." (para 8) 17. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "If despite informing the assessing officer if the jurisdictional notice was issued in the name of erstwhile company, then the basis on which the jurisdiction was invoked was fundamentally at odds with the legal principle that the amalgamating entity ceases to exist upon the approved scheme of amalgamation and the participation in the proceedings by the assessee cannot operate as an estoppel against law." (para 5) "Considering the facts of the present case on the touchstone of the aforestated well settled propositions of law therefore, the Order of assessment u/s 143(3)... issued in the name of a non-existent entity are void." (para 6) 21. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Reliance Industries Ltd. vs. P.L. Roongta (171 taxmann.com 467) has recently reiterated that where the Revenue had knowledge of the amalgamation and still proceeded to frame assessment in the name of a non-existent entity, such assessment would be void ab initio. The Hon'ble High Court further held that all consequential proceedings would also stand vitiated. The relevant paras are reproduced below for the sake of brevity: "The assessment orders have been passed in the name of RPEL....