TAX (CENTRAL-2) vs. M/S MEVRON PROJECTS PVT. LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/745/2015HC Delhi29 September 20155 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that a notice under Section 153C issued to an entity that had ceased to exist due to amalgamation cannot form a valid basis for assessment. The High Court agreed that the defect was not curable.

What were the facts?

A search operation led to a notice under Section 153C being issued to the assessee. The assessee had amalgamated with another company prior to the assessment order being passed, making it non-existent.

What were the issues?

Whether an assessment order passed against an entity that has ceased to exist due to amalgamation is valid. Whether a notice under Section 153C issued to a non-existent entity is curable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

ITA Nos. 745,746,748,749 & 750 of 2015 Page 1 of 5

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 19,20,22-24 +

ITA 745/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

TAX (CENTRAL-2)

..... Appellant

Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing

counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Junior

Standing counsel &Ms. Radhika Gupta, Advocate.

versus

M/S MEVRON PROJECTS PVT. LTD.

..... Respondent

with

ITA 746/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

TAX (CENTRAL-2),

..... Appellant

Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing

counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Junior

Standing counsel &Ms. Radhika Gupta, Advocate.

versus

M/S MEVRON PROJECTS PVT. LTD.

..... Respondent

Through

With

ITA 748/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-2)

..... Appellant

Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing

counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Junior This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 21:54:08

ITA Nos. 745,746,748,749 & 750 of 2015 Page 2 of 5

Standing counsel &Ms. Radhika Gupta, Advocate.

versus

M/S MEVRON PROJECTS PVT. LTD

..... Respondent

With

ITA 749/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

TAX (CENTRAL-2),

..... Appellant

Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing

counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Junior

Standing counsel &Ms. Radhika Gupta, Advocate.

versus

M/S MEVRON PROJECTS PVT. LTD.

..... Respondent

And

ITA 750/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

TAX (CENTRAL-2)

.... Appellant

Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing

counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Junior

Standing counsel &Ms. Radhika Gupta, Advocate.

versus

M/S MEVRON PROJECTS PVT. LTD.

..... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R %

29.09.2015 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 21:54:08

ITA Nos. 745,746,748,749 & 750 of 2015 Page 3 of 5

CM APPL No.21516 of 2015(exemption) in ITA 748 of 2015 CM APPL No.21517 of 2015(exemption) in ITA 749 of 2015 CM APPL No.21518 of 2015(exemption) in ITA 750 of 2015

1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

ITA Nos. 745 of 2015, 746 of 2015, 748 of 2015, 749 of 2015 & 750 of 2015

2.

These five appeals by the Revenue are directed against the common order dated 20th February 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) for the Assessment Years (‘AYs’) 2003-04, 2005-05, 2006-07, 2007- 08, 2008-09.

3.

A search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of B.K. Dhingra, Poonam Dhingra and Madhusudan Buildcon Pvt. Ltd on 20th October 2008. Certain documents were purportedly recovered from the residential premises of B.K.Dhingra which were said to belong to the Respondent Assessee. A notice was issued under Section 153C of the Act to the Assessee first on 8th July 2010. In response thereto the Assessee filed a return on 18th September 2010 for AY 2003-04 declaring its income. The Assessing Officer (‘AO’) by order dated 31st December 2010 assessed the income as Rs.32,25,180.

4.

In the appeal filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)], the Assessee pointed out that following its amalgamation with This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 21:54:08

ITA Nos. 745,746,748,749 & 750 of 2015 Page 4 of 5

Windchimes Construction Pvt. Ltd (‘WCPL’) with effect from 1st April 2008 as per the order of the High Court dated 16th August 2010, the assessment was required to be made on WCPL. Inter alia, reliance was placed on the decisions of this Court in Spice Entertainment Ltd. v. CIT (ITA No. 475 of 2000) and Pampasar Distillery Ltd. v. ACIT (2007) 15 SOT 331 (ITAT[Kolk]).

5.

The CIT (A), however, noted that in response to the notice under Section 153C the Director of the Assessee had used the letterhead of the Assessee in writing a letter dated 10th November 2010, in which there was no mention of amalgamation. The CIT (A) also noted that a return of income was filed in the name of the Assessee itself without disclosing the above fact and rejected the ground of the Assessee. The ITAT, however, accepted the contention of the Assessee that a notice issued under Section 153C of the Act to an entity which had already become non-existent on account of its merger with other company could not be a valid basis for framing an assessment against the Assessee.

6.

This Court has, by a detailed order dated 19th August 2015 in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Images Credit & Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (ITA Nos. 582, 584 and 431 of 2015), negatived the challenge by the Revenue to a similar order of the ITAT, which affirmed the order of the CIT (A) and held that continuing proceedings under Section 153C of the Act against an entity This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 21:54:08

ITA Nos. 745,746,748,749 & 750 of 2015 Page 5 of 5

which was not in existence in law deserved to be quashed. The only distinguishing feature in the present case is that while the entity to which the notice was issued under Section 153 C of the Act was in existence on the date of the notice i.e. 6th July 2010, it ceased to be in existence on the date of framing the assessment pursuant to such notice.

7.

In the present case the defect of the AO in framing an assessment on 31st December 2010 against the Assessee by which time it was not in existence on account of its merger with WPCL (effective 1st April 2008) was not a curable defect. Consequently, the impugned order of the ITAT setting aside the order of the CIT (A) does not suffer from any legal infirmity.

8.

No substantial question of law arises for consideration. The appeal is dismissed.

S.MURALIDHAR, J

VIBHU BAKHRU, J SEPTEMBER 29, 2015/mg This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 21:54:08

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →