PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

416 ITR 613Supreme Court of India2019#253 most cited

What is PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. authority for?

A notice issued under section 148 to a non-existent entity, such as an amalgamating company post-merger, is a substantive illegality, rendering assessment proceedings void ab initio. Participation in such proceedings does not estop the assessee from challenging the validity of the notice.

308

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. · section 148 · section 143(2) · non-existent entity · amalgamating company · merger · void ab initio · substantive illegality · estoppel · reassessment proceedings

Also reported as

107 Taxmann.com 375265 Taxmann 515

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 143(3)Section 147Section 292BSection 143(2)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 170transferor companytransferee companysection 2(1a)section 2(31)section 159section 39amalgamationsection 292bscheme of arrangementsection 292legal representative

Judgments citing PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

Tata Nyk Shipping Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. CIT International Taxation-3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1067/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tata Nyk Shipping Pte. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., International Taxation-3, 6, Shenton Way, #18-08B, New Delhi Oue Downtown 2, Singapore Pan :Aadct9945P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 263Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. Tata NYK Shipping Pte. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltd., International Taxation-3, 6, Shenton Way, #18-08B, New Delhi Oue Downtown 2, Singapore PAN :AADCT9945P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Sh. Aditya Vohra, Advocate Sh. Hardeep Singh Chawla, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 08.12.2022 Date of pronouncement 09.03.2023 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: Caption…

PCIT-07, Delhi vs. M/S Wel Intertrade Pvt. Ltd

ITA - 135 / 2023HC Delhi07 Mar 2023
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…2023:DHC:2439-DB ITA 135/2023 Pg.1 of 12 $~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 07.03.2023 + ITA 135/2023 PCIT-07, DELHI ......Appellant Through: Mr Sunil Agarwal, Sr Standing Counsel with Mr Utkarsh Tiwari, Adv. versus M/S WEL INTERTRADE PVT. LTD. ......Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): CM Appl.11087/2023 1. Allowed,…

International Hospital Limited vs. DCIT Circle 12 (2)

ITA - 116 / 2023HC Delhi28 Feb 2023

Bench: The Next Date Of Hearing.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

….2022 discloses that the Tribunal has not adverted to any judgment which may perhaps have had bearing in the matter, including the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC) or the other judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 v. Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd. (2022) SCC OnLine SC 407. 9. We may also note that this bench has also rendered a judgment on 02.02.2023 in ITA 115/2019 titled CIT v. Sony Mobile Communications, in which the aforementioned judgments ren…

John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Usa vs. DCIT International Taxation, Circle 3(1)(1), Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 1873/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor & Vibhu Jain, AdvsFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar Bharati, CIT DR

…there with the ld AO has preferred to pass assessment order upon non existing entity. The ld AR relied on the following judgment in support of argument that such an order was passed on existing entities is void ab initio: i. PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., 416 ITR 613 (SC) ii. Spice Entertainment Ltd. v. CIT, ITA No. 475-476/2011 dated 03.08.2011 (DHC) iii. PCIT v. Transcent MT Services (P.) Ltd. [2019] 109 taxmann.com 421 (DHC) iv. CIT, Bangalore v. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd. [2015] 9557 taxmann.com 159 (Kar.) v. Teleperformance Global Services (P.) Ltd Vs. ACIT, [2021] 127 taxmann.com 46 (Bom.) vi. DCI…

John Wiley & Sons, Inc., United States vs. DCIT, Int.Taxation, Circle 3(1)(1), New Delhi

The appeals are allowed

ITA 1872/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor & Vibhu Jain, AdvsFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar Bharati, CIT DR

…there with the ld AO has preferred to pass assessment order upon non existing entity. The ld AR relied on the following judgment in support of argument that such an order was passed on existing entities is void ab initio: i. PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., 416 ITR 613 (SC) ii. Spice Entertainment Ltd. v. CIT, ITA No. 475-476/2011 dated 03.08.2011 (DHC) iii. PCIT v. Transcent MT Services (P.) Ltd. [2019] 109 taxmann.com 421 (DHC) iv. CIT, Bangalore v. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd. [2015] 9557 taxmann.com 159 (Kar.) v. Teleperformance Global Services (P.) Ltd Vs. ACIT, [2021] 127 taxmann.com 46 (Bom.) vi. DCI…

S.S. Oral Hygiene Products P. Ltd ( Now Merged With Colgate Palmolive (I) Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 774/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM SS Oral Hygeine Products Private DCIT CIR 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 774/MUM/2013 (Assessment Year 2008-09) SS Oral Hygeine Products Private DCIT CIR 3(3) Ltd [Now Merged With Colgate – [Now Commissi…

Ss Oral Hygeine Products P.Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate-Palmolive (India) Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3) ( Now Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 5677/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM SS Oral Hygeine Products Private DCIT CIR 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 774/MUM/2013 (Assessment Year 2008-09) SS Oral Hygeine Products Private DCIT CIR 3(3) Ltd [Now Merged With Colgate – [Now Commissi…

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. S.S Oral Hygiene Products P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 5538/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM SS Oral Hygeine Products Private DCIT CIR 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 774/MUM/2013 (Assessment Year 2008-09) SS Oral Hygeine Products Private DCIT CIR 3(3) Ltd [Now Merged With Colgate – [Now Commissi…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 4, Surat vs. Shri Amatlal Devchandbhai Patel, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 218/SRT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainia.C.I.T., Late Amratlal Devchandbhai Patel, Central Circle-4, Through L/H-Jignesh Amritlal Patel, Vs. Surat. 8, Pratistha Park, Sarelawadi, Ghod Dod Road, Surat. Pan No. Abrpp 3569 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 269TSection 271ESection 27ISection 292B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.C.I.T., Late Amratlal Devchandbhai Patel, Central Circle-4, Through L/H-Jignesh Amritlal Patel, Vs. Surat. 8, Pratistha Park, Sarelawadi, Ghod dod Road, Surat. PAN No. ABRPP 3569 R Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Department represented by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr.DR Assessee represented by Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Date of hearing 13/01/2023 Date of pronouncement 30/01/2023 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Power Links Transmission Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 7322/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vinod Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 250(6)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Addl. CIT, Range-7, VersuS M/s. Power Link Transmission Ltd., 10th Floor, DLF Tower-A, New Delhi. District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi. PAN: AABCT7775M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Ld. Adv. Ms. Sumisha, Ld. CA Respondent by : Sh. Vinod Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR Date of hearing: 04.01.2023 Date of order : 16.01.2023 ORDER PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue Department against the order…

ACIT 6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri. Dattatray Pandurang Mhaiskar, Mumbai

In the result, the impugned notice is set aside

ITA 2468/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2468/Mum/2021 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri. Dattatray Jayantika Singh Pandurang Mhaiskar Asst. Commissioner Of Mumbai Income Tax 6(1) (1) 501, Dattashram Lane बिधम/ Mumbai No.1 Hindu Colony, Room No 504, Aaykar Vs. Dadar, Mumbai Bhavan, M.K.Road, 400014 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aatpm1257A (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Pooja Rander प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ashish Kumar (Sr. Ar.) सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 27.12.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 27.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 20.01.2021, Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), 53 Mumbai

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja RanderFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar (SR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 159Section 22Section 292BSection 3Section 37(1)

…esult, the impugned notice is set aside. Petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequentially, the order of assessment dated 31/12/2018 also stands annulled.” 9. Apart from that, Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Pr.CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. reported in 416 ITR 613 held that even participation in the proceedings in such circumstances cannot operate as an estoppel against law. Therefore, any notice u/s.1 43(2) order or any assessment order issued to an non existing entity is bad in law. 8 I.T.A. No. 2468/Mum/2021 Dattatray Pandurang Mhaiskar 10. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the…

Konecranes P.Ltd, Pune vs. Asst CIT Cir 3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1497/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं. 1497/मुं/ 2017 ("न.व. 2012-13) Konecranes Private Limited Pan:Aaacw0328C(Pan Of Merged Entity) Pan Of Old Entity Aacck9930E Being Konecranes India Private Limited) 19, Level -2, Muttha Towers, Don Bosco Road,Yerwada, Dist. Pune – 411 006. ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(2)(2), Mumbai. Room No.608, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Dhanesh Bafna With S/Shri Amol Mahajan & Hardik Nirmal ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/12/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 31/01/2017 Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 92Ca(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [ In Short ‘The Act’], For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2 2. The Assessee Has Filed Additional Ground Of Appeal Vide Application Dated 29/08/2019 Assailing The Validity Of Assessment Order Passed In The Name Of A Non-Existing Entity. The Additional Ground Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna with S/Shri Amol Mahajan & Hardik NirmalFor Respondent: Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…is unsustainable being void-ab-initio. The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee in support of 4 his submissions placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., 107 taxmann.com 375/ 416 ITR 613. 3. Per contra, Ms. Samrudhi Dhananjay Hande representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order. The ld. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee never communicated the fact of amalgamation of Konecranes India Pvt. Ltd. with WMI Konecranes India Ltd. to the Assessing Officer. The ld. Departmental Representative furthe…

The Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, CIT(A) vs. M/S Eit Services India Pvt Ltd

Appeal is dismissed;

ITA/875/2018HC Karnataka12 Dec 2022

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

Section 260

…- 1 - ITA No. 875 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T G SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 875 OF 2018 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT(A) 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(2) 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095 …APPELLANTS (BY SHRI. K.V. ARAVIN…

Siemens Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1954/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C(3)

…rom pages 39 – 41, we find that the assessee again intimated about the amalgamation and the fact that the erstwhile entity has ceased to exist as an independent legal entity. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pr. CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 416 ITR 613 (SC) held that where the assessee company was amalgamated with another company and thereby lost its existence, assessment order passed subsequently in name of the said non-existing entity, is without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further held that participation in the assessment proceedings cannot operate a…

Vodafone Idea Ltd (Erstwhile Aditya Birla Telecom Ltd), Mumbai vs. PCIT-Circle 5, Mumbai

ITA 662/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blevodafone Idea Limited V. Pcit – Circle 5 {Erstwhile Known As Aditya Birla Telecom Limited} Room No. 515, 5Thfloor Birla Centurion, 10Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Plot No. 794, B Wing Mumbai - 400020 Pandurang Budhkar Marg Worli, Mumbai – 400030 Pan: Aaacb2100P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By Shri J. D. Mistry : Shri Madhur Aggarwal & Shri Ninad Patade Department Represented By : Shri Achal Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 263

…twhile name which is not in existence and passed the Assessment Order in the name of the non-existing company even though he is aware of the fact. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr.CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited [2019] 416 ITR 613 is squarely covered. Ld.AR submitted that the facts in the present appeal is similar to the facts in the Maruti Suzuki case (supra) and it clearly indicates that order passed by the Assessing Officer is illegal in terms of its jurisdiction and null and void in the eyes of law. 20 Vodafone Idea Limited 13. Further, he submitted that the appeal fi…

Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed, whereas,

ITA 99/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 10A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘I’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Ltd., Circle-2, Motorola Excellence Centre, Gurgaon 415/2, Sector-14, M.G. Road, Gurgaon PAN :AABCM2326D (Appellant) (Respondent) And Assessment Year: 2005-06 DCIT, Vs. Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Circle-2, Ltd. (formerly known as Gurgaon Motorola Indian Electronics Pvt. Ltd.) Motorola Excellence Centre, 415/2, Sector-14, M.G. Road, Gurgaon PAN :AABCM2326D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. G.…

DCIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Motorola India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed, whereas,

ITA 60/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 10A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘I’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Ltd., Circle-2, Motorola Excellence Centre, Gurgaon 415/2, Sector-14, M.G. Road, Gurgaon PAN :AABCM2326D (Appellant) (Respondent) And Assessment Year: 2005-06 DCIT, Vs. Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Circle-2, Ltd. (formerly known as Gurgaon Motorola Indian Electronics Pvt. Ltd.) Motorola Excellence Centre, 415/2, Sector-14, M.G. Road, Gurgaon PAN :AABCM2326D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. G.…

ITO Ward - 1(1), New Delhi vs. Asm Pipes Private Limited (Earlier Known As Mar Fashion Pvt Ltd), New Delhi

In the result, C.O No.23/Del/2020 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 9897/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…1 AND C.O. No. 23/Del/2020 ITO Vs. M/s. ASM Pipes Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 9897/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2011-12) Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/s. ASM Pipes Pvt. Ltd., [earlier known as Mar Ward : 1 (1), Fashions Pvt. Ltd.,] New Delhi. Plot No. 67, Road No. 41, West Punjabi Bagh, West Delhi – 110 026. PAN No. AAGCA0304C AND C. O. No. 23/Del/2020 [ in I.T.A. No. 9897/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2011-12) ] Income Tax Officer, M/s. ASM Pipes Pvt. Ltd., Vs. [earlier known as Mar Fashions War…

Bic Cello (India) P. Ltd. (Bic India) (As Seccessor to Bic Cello Exports P.Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT (Central)-3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 777/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Bic Cello (India) P. Ltd. (As Successor To Bic Cello Pr.Cit(Central)-3 Exports P.Ltd) Room No-1991, 19Thfloor, G-1,701/702, Lotus Air India Building, Nariman Vs. Corporate Park, Jaicoach W Point, Mumbai-400 021 E Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai- 400 063 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc9698R Assessee By : Shri. Dhanesh Bafana & Ms. Hirali Desai. Revenue By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade, Cit Dr. Date Of Hearing: 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 09-11-2022

For Appellant: Shri. Dhanesh Bafana, & MsFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM Bic Cello (India) P. Ltd. (As Successor to Bic Cello PR.CIT(CENTRAL)-3 Exports P.Ltd) Room No-1991, 19THFloor, G-1,701/702, Lotus Air India Building, Nariman Vs. Corporate Park, Jaicoach W Point, Mumbai-400 021 E Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai- 400 063 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AACCC9698R Assessee by : Shri. Dhanesh Bafana, & Ms. Hirali Desai. Revenue by : Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT DR. Date of hearing: 11.08.2022 Date of pronouncement: 09-11-2022 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 1. This…

DCIT 2 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India (Successor to State Bank of Travancore), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3574/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

Section 14ASection 36Section 37(1)Section 43B

…rding to the Learned Counsel of the assessee, the assessment has been completed by the Assessing Officer on non-existent entity, which is void ab initio in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (2019) 416 ITR 613(SC). The Learned Counsel also relied on the ITAT Mumbai Bench decision in the case of State Bank of India (successor to erstwhile state Bank of Indore) in ITA Nos. 277 to 280/Mum/2022 and State Bank of India (successor to State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur) in ITA No. 2875/Mum/2019. 8. The Learned DR, on the other hand, submitted that in view of th…