THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. M/S. GREENSPACE INFRATECH PVT. LTD., VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 510/AHD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 April 2025AY 2013-14Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee company's status was 'strike off' and it had not been revived. As per the Companies Act, a dissolved company ceases to operate, except for settling liabilities. Since the company was dissolved, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee were rendered infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a private limited company, filed a return showing a loss. The assessment was completed at a high income with several additions, including unexplained cash credit, sundry creditors, and investment. The CIT(A) granted relief on the unexplained investment.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals are maintainable when the assessee company has been struck off and not revived.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 68,Section 143(3),Section 248,Section 248(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMARMS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate, Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, AR
For Respondent: Shri AP Singh, CIT. DR
Hearing: 20.03.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

I.TA. No.510/Ahd/2023
I.TA. No.699/Ahd/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

O R D E R PER: SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

These cross appeals have been filed by the Revenue and the Assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short) dated 21.04.2023, passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a Private Limited Company that filed return of income for the year under consideration on 02.08.2013 showing total loss at Rs.3,48,124/-. The case of assessee was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 28.03.2016 assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.33,83,12,280/-, by making following additions/disallowances:- & 699/Ahd/2023 Asst.Year –2013-14 - 3–

(i) Unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act - Rs. 6,56,66,047/- (ii) Unexplained Sundry Creditors/others - Rs. 77,02,144/- (iii) Unexplained investment - Rs.26,49,40,943/-

3.

Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has given relief to the assessee by deleting an amount of Rs. 26,49,40,943/- which was added to the income of the assessee on account of unexplained investment; and confirmed rest of the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer.

4.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee and Revenue, both are in appeal before the Tribunal. The Revenue is in appeal against the relief allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) while the assessee is in appeal against the additions/disallowances sustained by the Ld. CIT(A).

5.

At the time of hearing for clarification on 20.03.2025, the Bench has confronted to the assessee/Ld. AR regarding the current status of the assessee company which has been shown on the Website of Ministry of Corporate Affairs as follows:-

ITA Nos.510 & 699/Ahd/2023 Asst.Year –2013-14 - 4– & 699/Ahd/2023 Asst.Year –2013-14 - 5–

6.

As per Section 248(5) of the Companies Act, 2013, the effect of striking off the name of the company is as follows:

Section 248 ….. (5) “At the expiry of the time mentioned in the notice, the

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →