COMFUND CONSULTING LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1850/BANG/2017Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 January 2022AY 1993-943 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issues to the Assessing Officer (AO) to take an appropriate decision on the outstanding demand, considering the dissolution of the assessee company by the NCLT.

What were the facts?

The assessee company was challenging an addition of Rs. 45.69 crores. Subsequently, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) ordered the dissolution of the assessee company, noting it had no assets.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO is sustainable in light of the subsequent dissolution of the assessee company by the NCLT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 41(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI B. R. BASKARAN & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Hearing: 11.01.2022Pronounced: 11.01.2022

PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 19.6.2017 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-2, Bengaluru and it relates to the assessment year 1993-94. The assessee is challenging the decision of Ld CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.45.69 crores made by the AO u/s 41(1) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short].

2.

At the time of hearing, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee company has since been disallowed by the order dated 3.12.2021 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru

M/s. Comfund Consulting Ltd., Bangalore Benches (NCLT) in IA No.114 of 2021 in CP(IB) No.202/BB/2020. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the Income Tax Department was a party in the committee of creditors formed by NCLT. He submitted that the NCLT has recorded the fact that the assessee company does not have any asset. Accordingly, the Ld. A.R. submitted that outstanding dues cannot be recovered by the department as the assessee company has been dissolved. The Ld A.R further submitted that the assessee herein is a public limited company and hence the provisions of sec.179 are also not applicable to it. Accordingly, he submitted that the demands raised by the income tax department shall become infructuous and accordingly prayed for allowing the appeal of the assessee on the above discussed reasons.

3.

The Ld. D.R. submitted that the A.O. was not aware of the order passed by National Company Law Tribunal and accordingly, he prayed that all the matters may be restored to his file for dealing with them in accordance with law.

4.

Having heard the rival submissions, we find merit in the contentions of the Ld. D.R. Accordingly, we restore all the issues contested by the assessee in the present appeal and also the fact of dissolution of the assessee company by NCLT, which was brought to our notice by Ld. A.R., to the file of the A.O., so that he could take appropriate decision on the outstanding demand in accordance with law.

M/s. Comfund Consulting Ltd., Bangalore Page 3 of 3

More judgments on Section 41(1)

All 1,943 judgments and leading authorities on Section 41(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →