PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) -II vs. M/S. GARUDA IMAGING & DIAGNOSTICS PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/1248/2018HC DelhiDLHC01159146201811 October 2019Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present case is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited. Consequently, the assessments made against the assessee would not survive. The High Court found that no question of law arises from the ITAT's decision. The operative direction was that the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. The principle established is that if a company undergoes amalgamation and this is duly informed to the Assessing Officer, subsequent assessments against the original entity may not be sustainable, following the precedent set by the Supreme Court in the Maruti Suzuki India Limited case.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - II against an order concerning M/s. Garuda Imaging & Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. The assessee had informed the Assessing Officer about the amalgamation of M/s. Sindhu Holdings Ltd. and M/s. Garuda Imaging & Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. with M/s Bhandari Consultancy and Finance Ltd. The Revenue's appeal was filed against the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), though the specific order of the ITAT is not detailed in this High Court judgment. The High Court was considering the appeal after the ITAT had likely ruled in favour of the assessee.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessments made against the assessee would survive in light of the amalgamation of the assessee company with another entity. This is a question of law. The Revenue, through its counsel, submitted that the assessee had informed the Assessing Officer about the amalgamation. The Revenue relied on the Supreme Court decision in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 928, to argue that the assessments would not survive. The assessee's contentions are not explicitly recorded, but their submission regarding the amalgamation is noted.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~25. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 1248/2018

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) -II ..... Appellant

Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Adv.

versus

M/S. GARUDA IMAGING & DIAGNOSTICS PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rohit Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advs.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R % 11.10.2019 Mr. Hossain has taken instructions in terms of the last order. On instructions, he states that the assessee had informed of the amalgamation of M/s. Sindhu Holdings Ltd. and M/s. Garuda Imaging & Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. with M/s Bhandari Consultancy and Finance Ltd. to the Assessing Officer.

Aforesaid being the position, the present case is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 928, decided on 25.07.2019.

In view of the aforesaid, assessments made against the assessee would

not survive. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed, since no question of law arises.

VIPIN SANGHI, J

SANJEEV NARULA, J OCTOBER 11, 2019 N.Khanna

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →