GAURER & WEIL (INDIA) LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 9(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 384/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 October 2019AY 2008-0919 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings initiated and completed in the name of a non-existent entity (Bombay Paints Ltd.) are without jurisdiction. Following the Supreme Court's decision in PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., such assessments are a nullity.

What were the facts?

The assessee, successor to Bombay Paints Ltd., claimed deduction for waived interest. The AO reopened the assessment under Section 147, treating the waived interest as income. The assessment order was passed in the name of the erstwhile Bombay Paints Ltd., which had ceased to exist due to amalgamation.

What were the issues?

Whether an assessment order passed in the name of an amalgamated company that has ceased to exist is valid. Whether waived interest, previously disallowed under Section 43B, can be brought to tax upon waiver.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G”

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM

आदेशकीप्रनिनिनिअग्रेनर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी/ The Appellant 1. 2. प्रत्यथी/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A) आयकरआयुक्त/ CIT- concerned 4. 5. यवभागीयप्रयतयनयि, आयकरअपीलीयअयिकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →