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 366,470 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.

Kalna Regulated Market Committee (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Burdwan

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1347/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1346 To 1348/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Kalna Regulated Market Committee ………………………….……….……Appellant (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Poddar Commercial Complex (1St Floor), Purbasha Bus Stand, Alisha, Burdwan, Wb -713103. [Pan: Aaajk1202A] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan..………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subham Bera, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders All Dated 21.01.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018–19. Ita No.1346/Kol/2025 Is Pertaining To The Quantum Addition & Ita Nos.1347 & 1348/Kol/2025 Are Relaying To Levying Of Penalty U/S 271Aac(1) & 270A Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. 2. At The Outset, It Reveals That The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed After A Delay Of 84 Days & For The Said Delay, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petitions. We Find That The Reasons Cited In The Petition For

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

…doubt that Kalna Regulated Market Committee has been dissolved much earlier and it was in the knowledge of the lower authorities. Now coming to the judicial pronouncement the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd reported in [2019] 416 ITR 613 (SC) has held that assessment/reassessment order was issued in the name of company which is ceased to exist due to amalgamation is void ab initio and this Enfotainment Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, in [(2012) 247 CTR 500 (Del)] where it was held that an assessment made in the name of an amalgamating company after its cessation is invalid. G…

Kalna Regulated Market Committee (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Burdwan

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1346/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1346 To 1348/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Kalna Regulated Market Committee ………………………….……….……Appellant (Presently Purba Burdwan Zilla Regulated Market Committee), Poddar Commercial Complex (1St Floor), Purbasha Bus Stand, Alisha, Burdwan, Wb -713103. [Pan: Aaajk1202A] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan..………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subham Bera, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders All Dated 21.01.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018–19. Ita No.1346/Kol/2025 Is Pertaining To The Quantum Addition & Ita Nos.1347 & 1348/Kol/2025 Are Relaying To Levying Of Penalty U/S 271Aac(1) & 270A Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. 2. At The Outset, It Reveals That The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed After A Delay Of 84 Days & For The Said Delay, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petitions. We Find That The Reasons Cited In The Petition For

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

…doubt that Kalna Regulated Market Committee has been dissolved much earlier and it was in the knowledge of the lower authorities. Now coming to the judicial pronouncement the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd reported in [2019] 416 ITR 613 (SC) has held that assessment/reassessment order was issued in the name of company which is ceased to exist due to amalgamation is void ab initio and this Enfotainment Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, in [(2012) 247 CTR 500 (Del)] where it was held that an assessment made in the name of an amalgamating company after its cessation is invalid. G…

Income-Tax Officer, WD.4(2)(1), Ahemdabad vs. Late Khodaji Ranchhodji Thakor Legal Heir Narendakumar Khodaji Thakor, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed

ITA 941/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 941/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-2017

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 292B

…eath of the assessee. The Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue’s Special Leave Petition, thereby affirming that any notice issued to a deceased person is void and without legal effect. In Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [(2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC)], the Hon’ble Court held that an assessment order passed in the name of a non-existent entity, being void ab initio, cannot be validated by section 292B or section 292BB of the Act. The Court held that participation or lack of objection by the assessee does not confer jurisdiction upon the Assessing Officer when the very foundation of the p…

The Sangli Salary Earners Co Op Society Ltd, Sangli vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3 Sangli, Sangli

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2254/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2254/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Sangli Salary Earners Co V The Income Tax Officer, Op Society Ltd., S. Ward-3, Sangli. 1104 B, Harbhat Road, Main City, Sangli – 416416 Pan: Aaaat0980D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Amit Sudhir Shintre(Virtual) Revenue By Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 17/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21, Dated 27.08.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Read With Section 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.09.2022. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) Relying On The Decision Of Totgars Co-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”बी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No.2254/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Sangli Salary Earners Co V The Income Tax Officer, Op Society Ltd., s. Ward-3, Sangli. 1104 B, Harbhat Road, Main City, Sangli – 416416 PAN: AAAAT0980D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Amit Sudhir Shintre(Virtual) Revenue by Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.CIT Date of hearing 17/11/2025 Date of pronouncement 17/11/2025 आदेश/ O…

Madan Lal Tomar, Agra vs. ITO, Ward 2(1)(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 51/AGR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Sarvesh Devi Vs. Ito, (Legal Heir Of Late Madan Lal Ward-2(1)(1), Tomar, 51, Keshav Kunj, Agra Pratap Nagar, Agra, 282 001, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaxpt3982D Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/11/2025 O R D E R 1. The Appeal In Ita No. 51/Agr/2025 For Ay 2009-10, Arises Out Of The Order Of The Ld National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Nfac’, In Short] Dated 09.12.2024 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 25.07.2019 By The Ito, Ward-4(2), Agra (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’).

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 292B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH “SMC”: AGRA BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through virtual hearing) Sarvesh Devi Vs. ITO, (legal heir of Late Madan Lal Ward-2(1)(1), Tomar, 51, Keshav Kunj, Agra Pratap Nagar, Agra, 282 001, UP (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAXPT3982D Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA Revenue by: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20/08/2025 Date of pronouncement 13/11/2025 O R D E R 1. The appeal in ITA No. 51/AGR/2025 for AY 2009-10, arises out of the order of the ld National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short]…

Sarvesh Devi (Legal Heir of Late Madan Lal Tomar), Agra vs. ITO, Ward 2(1)(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 311/AGR/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Sarvesh Devi (Legal Heir Vs. Income Tax Officer, Of Late Madan Lal Tomar), Ward-4(3)(1), 51, Keshavkunj Pratap Hathras Nagar, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Eshpd4540M Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH “SMC”: AGRA BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through virtual hearing) Sarvesh Devi (legal Heir Vs. Income Tax Officer, of Late Madan Lal Tomar), Ward-4(3)(1), 51, Keshavkunj Pratap Hathras Nagar, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: ESHPD4540M Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA Revenue by: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/08/2025 Date of pronouncement 13/11/2025 O R D E R 1. The appeal in ITA No. 311/AGR/2025 for AY 2007-08, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in sho…

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Late Khodaji Ranchhodji Thakor Legal Heir Narendakumar Khodaji Thakor, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed

ITA 948/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.948/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Ito Late Khodaji Ranchhodji Ward-4(2)(1) बनाम/ Thakor V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Legal Heir Narendrakumar Khodaji Thakor Ahmedabad – 382 481 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afwpt 1453 K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 24/02/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-2018. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.948/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The ITO Late Khodaji Ranchhodji Ward-4(2)(1) बनाम/ Thakor v/s. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Legal Heir Narendrakumar Khodaji Thakor Ahmedabad – 382 481 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AFWPT 1453 K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषण…

Argos Holdings Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3633/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR
Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 194LSection 1ISection 260Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)

…a company is dissolved or amalgamated, it ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. Any assessment or demand order passed thereafter in the name of such a non-existent entity is a nullity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pr. CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [(2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC)] categorically held that framing of an assessment in the name of a non-existent amalgamating company is void ab initio and not a mere procedural irregularity. The Delhi High Court in Spice Enfotainment Ltd. v. CIT [(2012) 247 CTR 500 (Del); (2012) 280 ITR 43 (Del)], SLP dismissed [(2017) 398 ITR (St.) 4 (SC)], reiterated the same principle,…

Argos Holdings Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3632/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR
Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 194LSection 1ISection 260Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)

…a company is dissolved or amalgamated, it ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. Any assessment or demand order passed thereafter in the name of such a non-existent entity is a nullity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pr. CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [(2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC)] categorically held that framing of an assessment in the name of a non-existent amalgamating company is void ab initio and not a mere procedural irregularity. The Delhi High Court in Spice Enfotainment Ltd. v. CIT [(2012) 247 CTR 500 (Del); (2012) 280 ITR 43 (Del)], SLP dismissed [(2017) 398 ITR (St.) 4 (SC)], reiterated the same principle,…

JCIT(OSD), Delhi vs. M/S Igt Solution Private Limited, Maharastra

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2126/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2017-18 Jcit (Osd), Vs. M/S Igt Solution Private Ltd., Circle-10(1), Unit No.1, Ground Floor, New Delhi. A Wing, Business2Mantri, Survey No.197/2 To 4 To 7B, Dukirklines, So Pune City, Pune – 411014, Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaci5079A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Priya Tandon, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2025 Order

For Appellant: Ms Priya Tandon, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 JCIT (OSD), Vs. M/s IGT Solution Private Ltd., Circle-10(1), Unit No.1, Ground Floor, New Delhi. A Wing, Business2Mantri, Survey No.197/2 to 4 to 7B, Dukirklines, SO Pune City, Pune – 411014, Maharashtra. PAN: AAACI5079A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms Priya Tandon, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 15.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30.10.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This is an appeal…

DCIT Circle 2.3.1, Mumbai vs. Prestige Holiday Resorts Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 and 3 are

ITA 4162/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 2(11)Section 2(22)(e)Section 253(3)Section 254(1)

…d company was converted into LLP and was offered / allotted different PAN, copy of such PAN is already placed on record. The issue of order passed in non-existing entity is now settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Reported in 416 ITR 613. The facts of the present case are identical to the facts of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. In the said case, the ld. AO had issued notice as well as passed assessment order in the name of erstwhile entity namely Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd. Even though said entity was amalgamated with Maruti Suzuki Ltd. And such fact was informed to ld. AO during p…

DCIT Circle 2.3.1, Mumbai vs. Prestige Holiday Resorts Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 and 3 are

ITA 4161/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 2(11)Section 2(22)(e)Section 253(3)Section 254(1)

…d company was converted into LLP and was offered / allotted different PAN, copy of such PAN is already placed on record. The issue of order passed in non-existing entity is now settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Reported in 416 ITR 613. The facts of the present case are identical to the facts of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. In the said case, the ld. AO had issued notice as well as passed assessment order in the name of erstwhile entity namely Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd. Even though said entity was amalgamated with Maruti Suzuki Ltd. And such fact was informed to ld. AO during p…

Anguri Devi Khandelwal (Radha Mohan Khandelwal (Legal Heir), Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle-4, Jaipur

ITA 389/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, Ld. C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurva Awasthi, Ld. JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.389/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 Anguri Devi Khandelwal, cuke The DCIT, Vs. Radha Mohan Khandelwal (legal Circle-4, Jaipur. heir) 674, Khandaka Mansion, Bordi Ka Rasta, Kishanpole Bazar, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No. AIHPK4203A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Rohan Sogani, Ld. C.…

Late Sh Sethuraman Through Legal Heir Sh S Nishaanth, Chennai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by legal representative of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2615/CHNY/2024[2015-116]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Oct 2025AY 2015-116

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2615/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 Late Shri Sethuraman The Assistant (Rep. By Legal Heir Commissioner Of Income Shri S. Nishaanth), Vs. Tax, O 9/12, Subbarayan Street, Corporate Circle – 3(1), Nungambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Abhps 3001R (""यथ"/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.10.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter The “Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 14.08.2024 Arising Out Of The Order Dated 16.03.2023 Passed By The Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (Hereinafter Referred To As The "Ao") Passed U/S.147 R.W.S.144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter "The Act') For The Assessment Year 2015-16 (Hereinafter The "Ay").

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,‘सी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार "ग"र,"या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जगद"श, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 2615/CHNY/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 Late Shri Sethuraman The Assistant (Rep. by Legal Heir Commissioner of Income Shri S. Nishaanth), Vs. Tax, O 9/12, Subbarayan Street, Corporate Circle – 3(1), Nungambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 034. PAN: ABHPS 3001R (""यथ"/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Suresh Kumar Gu…

Anguri Devi Khandelwal (Radha Mohan Khandelwal (Legal Heir), Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle-4, Jaipur

Appeal is allowed and the impugned assessment order, and the impugned order passed by Learned

ITA 391/JPR/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT &
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 292BSection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’B-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu Xkks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihyla-@ITA No. 391 /JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2018-19 cuke Anguri Devi Khandelwal through The DCIT Vs. Radha Mohan Khandelwal (legal Circle-4 heir) Jaipur 674, Khandaka Mansion, Bordi Ka Rasta, Kishanpole Bazar, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AIHPK4203A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Rohan So…

Ch Marthanda Rao & Co, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward - 14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the order passed by the CIT(A) is modified in terms of our aforesaid observations, and the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our afore...

ITA 966/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Us:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)Section 69A

…2017, wherein it was held that assessments made on a company that has ceased to exist due to amalgamation or conversion are invalid. Also, a similar view had been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC), wherein it was held that assessments cannot be conducted on a non-existent entity and income disclosed by the successor entity must be considered to avoid double taxation. 15. We though principally concur with the Ld. A.R. that assessment cannot be conducted on a non-existent entity, but the same would require to be examined afresh with re…

Ch Marthanda Rao and Co, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward - 14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the order passed by the CIT(A) is modified in terms of our aforesaid observations, and the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our afore...

ITA 962/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)Section 69A

…2017, wherein it was held that assessments made on a company that has ceased to exist due to amalgamation or conversion are invalid. Also, a similar view had been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC), wherein it was held that assessments cannot be conducted on a non-existent entity and income disclosed by the successor entity must be considered to avoid double taxation. 15. We though principally concur with the Ld. A.R. that assessment cannot be conducted on a non-existent entity, but the same would require to be examined afresh with re…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S Trishul Developers, Bengaluru

ITA 767/BANG/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 292Section 69C

…irm at the relevant point of time of passing the assessment orders in these assessment years. 7.1 In this regard, we would like to take a note of the position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme in the case PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited reported in 416 ITR 613. The facts in this case are that Suzuki Motors Corporation, and Maruti Suzuki India limited (in short MSIL) constituted a joint venture with shareholding of 70% and 30%. Such joint venture was incorporated as Suzuki Motor India Ltd. Subsequently w.e.f. 8.6.2005 its name was changed to SPIL. On 28.11.2012 SPIL has filed its return of income. Upto…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Trishul Developers, Bangalore

ITA 766/BANG/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 292Section 69C

…irm at the relevant point of time of passing the assessment orders in these assessment years. 7.1 In this regard, we would like to take a note of the position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme in the case PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited reported in 416 ITR 613. The facts in this case are that Suzuki Motors Corporation, and Maruti Suzuki India limited (in short MSIL) constituted a joint venture with shareholding of 70% and 30%. Such joint venture was incorporated as Suzuki Motor India Ltd. Subsequently w.e.f. 8.6.2005 its name was changed to SPIL. On 28.11.2012 SPIL has filed its return of income. Upto…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Trishul Developers, Bangalore

ITA 764/BANG/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 292Section 69C

…g the assessment orders in these assessment years. ITA Nos.764, 767/Bang/2025 Page 12 of 52 7.1 In this regard, we would like to take a note of the position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme in the case PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited reported in 416 ITR 613. The facts in this case are that Suzuki Motors Corporation, and Maruti Suzuki India limited (in short MSIL) constituted a joint venture with shareholding of 70% and 30%. Such joint venture was incorporated as Suzuki Motor India Ltd. Subsequently w.e.f. 8.6.2005 its name was changed to SPIL. On 28.11.2012 SPIL has filed its return of income. Upto…