TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1440
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to "the Ld. CIT(A)] for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pressed two issues as under: (i) The appellate order was assailed by the assessee on the ground that the CIT(A) has upheld the invalid reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act. (ii) The appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is wrong as it has upheld the assessment order based on non-existing company (amalgamating company). 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed return of income on 28.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs. 'Nil'. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and ex-parte assessment u/s 144 of the Act was passed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the very income which was stated to have escaped in the reasons recorded did not find its place in the assessment order then the very jurisdiction of the AO under Explanation 1 to 147 fails and consequently no other addition can be made. The Ld. AR has in defence of the arguments relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT (Exemption) Vs. B.P. Poddar Foundation For Education reported in (2023) 148 taxmann.com 125 (Calcutta) and CIT-5, Mumbai Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. reported in (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bombay). The Ld. AR therefore, prayed that the addition made by the AO may kindly be deleted as without jurisdiction. 6. The Ld. DR on the other hand relied the orders of authorities below. 7. After hearing the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ped assessment. Therefore, investments in M/s Banas Finance Limited of Rs. 49,41,545/- which apparently was not subject matter of addition in the assessment framed by the AO, therefore, the very jurisdiction of the AO fails and the addition made by the AO are without jurisdiction. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT (Exemption) Vs. B.P. Poddar Foundation For Education (supra) wherein it has held as under: "14. While on this issue, we should bear in mind the decision in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra) wherein it was held that the assessing officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time and the notices is entitled to file their obj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tic Vintrade Pvt.Ltd. was amalgamated with AMPI Finance Limited vide order of the Hon'ble NCLT dated 08.02.2018 with the appointed date of amalgamation being 01.04.2016. The AO was duly informed by the assessee vide letter dated 13.10.2017 qua the said amalgamation a copy of which is available at page no. 11. Thereafter, again the assessee informed the AO vide letter dated 14.11.2019 about the amalgamation. However, the AO issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 31.03.2019 and went on with the passing of the order in the name of non-existing entity which was merged with the assessee company AMPI Finance Limited. The Ld. AR therefore, argued that the assessment framed on a non-existing entity is bad in law and may kindly be quashed. In defence o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of SPIL. The assessee filed appeal where one of the grounds urged was that the assessment order was without jurisdiction in as much as it had been passed in the name of an entity that had ceased to exist on the date of the assessment order. The Tribunal accepted the said plea of the assessee as a result of which the assessment order was set aside. On revenue's appeal the High Court following its earlier decision in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 affirmed the decision of the Tribunal. On appeal to the Supreme Court, it was held that. "33 In the present case, despite the fact that the assessing officer was informed of the amalgamating company having ceased to exist as a result of the approved scheme of amalg....