FIRESTONE INTERNATIONAL P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 983/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 December 2022AY 2009-103 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that an appeal filed by an erstwhile director of a company under liquidation is not maintainable. The appeal should have been signed by the appointed liquidator.

What were the facts?

The assessee company, M/s Firestone International Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against the Assessing Officer's order for AY 2009-10. The company was later ordered for liquidation by the National Company Law Tribunal and a liquidator was appointed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal due to the company being under liquidation and the appeal being signed by an unauthorized person.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 140(c)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “K” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Respondent: Smt. Samruddhi
Hearing: 14.09.2022Pronounced: 09.12.2022
1.

This appeal is filed by M/s Firestone International P. Ltd. against the order passed by the learned Assessing Officer under Section 143 read with section 144C of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on 8th February, 2013 determining the total income of ₹12,05,18,510/- against the returned income of ₹5,83,63,467/- for A.Y. 2009-10.

2.

The learned Departmental Representative, when the matter was called for hearing, submitted that the above

3.

Despite notice to the assessee on last several occasions since 2014, none appeared. On 26.04.2018, the counsel also has withdrawn his authority letter. Further, the above company has been referred for liquidation by the order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Bombay Bench, vide order dated 17.08.2021. Mr. Santanu T. Ray has been appointed the liquidator. When the company is under liquidation, the Board of Directors of the company ceased to exist. Now the appeal can be preferred only by liquidator. In the present case, the appeal is signed and verified by the erstwhile director. The same is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 140(c)(a) of the

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not maintainable.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09.12.2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →