M/S WIPRO GE HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/962/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC01016532201904 July 2025Bench: SURAJ GOVINDARAJ4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the writ petition. The Court held that, in line with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be served on an entity that no longer exists. Consequently, the proceedings initiated under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Act, including the notice dated December 13, 2016, and all further proceedings, were set aside. The Court also granted liberty to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings in the name of the resulting entity, if permissible under law. The ratio decidendi is that statutory notices under the Income Tax Act must be issued to existing legal entities.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Wipro GE Healthcare Private Limited (representing the merged entity M/s GE Medical Systems (India) Private Limited), filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka. The petition challenged proceedings initiated under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2010-11. Specifically, the petitioner sought to quash a notice under Section 148 dated December 13, 2016, and a draft assessment order dated December 14, 2018. The core of the petitioner's argument was that the notice was issued to a non-existent entity, M/s GE Medical Systems (India) Private Limited, which had been amalgamated into the petitioner company.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated December 13, 2016, for Assessment Year 2010-11, is valid when served on an entity that has been amalgamated and no longer exists? (Question of law turning on Section 148). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the notice under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was served on M/s G.E. Medical Systems (India) Private Limited, which had been amalgamated. The petitioner contended that as a new resulting company, M/s. Wipro G.E. Healthcare Private Limited, now exists, a notice issued to a non-existent entity cannot be proceeded with. The petitioner relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24243 WP No. 962 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 962 OF 2019 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

M/S. WIPRO GE HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED (FOR THE MERGED ENTITY M/S GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED) NO.4, KADUGODI INDUSTRIAL AREA, WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE – 560 067. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR. KEDAR V KULKARNI, TAX LEADER (SOUTH ASIA) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.R. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RANGE-7, ROOM NO.243, 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095.

2.

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVI RAJ Y.V, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24243 WP No. 962 of 2019

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 147 RWS 148 OF THE ACT ARE OPPOSED TO THE SAID PROVISIONS AND THEREFORE, WITHOUT JURISDICTION. QUASH THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT DTD 13.12.2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-A FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11.QUASH THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD 14.12.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-B PASSED BY THE R-1 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. “Declaring that the impugned proceedings initiated under section 147 rws 148 of the Act are opposed to the said provisions and therefore, without jurisdiction;

ii. Quashing the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 13.12.2016 (Annexure-A0no.147/ACIT-C- 7(1)(2)16-17 passed by Assistant commissioner of Income Tax circle 7(1) (2) Bengaluru.

iii. Quashing the Draft Assessment order dated 14.12.2018 (Annexure - B)NO.AAACG7655G/JCITSR- 7/2018-19 passed by 6it 65 5 Respondent in respect of assessment year 2010-11; and

iv. Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.”

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24243 WP No. 962 of 2019

2.

The contention of the petitioner is that notice under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been served on M/s G.E. Medical Systems (India) Private Limited, which has been amalgamated, and a new resulting Company is M/s. Wipro G.E. Healthcare Private Limited. As such, he submits that a notice having been issued on a non-existent entity, the same cannot be proceeded with. 3. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited,1 where the Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that no notice could have been served on an entity which no longer exists, the writ petition would have to be allowed. As such, I pass the following: ORDER. i) Writ petition is allowed.

1 (2020) 18 SCC 331/2019 INSL 815.

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24243 WP No. 962 of 2019

ii) The proceedings initiated under Section 147 r/w Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at Annexure-A and all further proceedings are hereby set aside. iii) Liberty is reserved to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings in the name of the resulting entity, if so permissible under law.

SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

KTY List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →