How many judgments cite Pr CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd.?

18 judgments on BharatTax cite Pr CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd. (402 ITR 21), spanning 2019 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Pr CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 147, Section 148, Section 144, Section 148A(b).

Pr CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd.

402 ITR 21High Court2018#6452 most cited

What is Pr CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd. authority for?

A statutory notice issued in the name of a non-existent entity, such as an amalgamating company after the amalgamation has become effective, renders the entire assessment void ab initio.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pr CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd. · section 148 · section 148A · notice to non-existent entity · void ab initio · assessment nullity · amalgamation

Also reported as

90 Taxmann.com 369253 Taxmann 409

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250 Section 147 Section 148 Section 144 Section 148A(b)Section 148A(d)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

transferor company section 170 resulting company section 2(31)section 39 transferee company carry forward of losses scheme of arrangement section 292b amalgamation demerger section 292

Judgments citing Pr CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd.

ACIT, Delhi vs. Cardio Technovention, Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1532/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 ACIT, Vs. Cardio Technovention, Delhi 105, First Floor, Anupam Plaza-II, Main Road, Ghazipur PAN: AAFFC4399B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Pranshu G., CA Sh. Aditya Gupta, Adv. Department by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of hearing 22.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 22.01.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in shor…

Varam Capital Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp. Circle-3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1222/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI HON'BLE S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.V.Muthuabhirami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 68

…ti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375 (SC) - CIT v. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd. [2015] 57 taxmann.com 159/232 Taxman 279/[2016] 380 ITR 272 (Kar.) - Pr. CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P.) Ltd. [2018] 90 taxmann.com 369 / 253 Taxman 409/402 ITR 21 (Delhi) - CIT Vs Spice Entertainment Ltd [Civil Appeal No. 285 of 2014, dated 2-11-2017] Varam Capital Pvt. Ltd. :- 9 -: 9. Similarly, a notice to the amalgamating company, subsequent to the amalgamation becoming effective and despite the fact of the amalgamation having been brought to the notice of the assessing officer, is void ab initio as held…

Aksh Optifibre Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle - 2, Alwar

In the result, all the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 170/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Akul Agarwal, C.A. (thr. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 234ASection 250

…sment would be a nullity in the eyes of law - a) PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. – Civil Appeal No 5409 of 2019 dated July 25, 2019 b) CIT v Intel Technology India (P) Ltd - [2016] 380 ITR 272(Kar.) c) PCIT v Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd - [2018] 402 ITR 21(Del) d) Spice Entertainment – 2012 (280) ELT 43 (Del.) e) M/s Micron Steels Limited (ITA No. 19 to 24/2014). A notice to the amalgamating company, subsequent to the amalgamation becoming effective and despite the fact of the amalgamation having been brought to the notice of the assessing officer, is void ab initio as held in the following decision…

DCIT-15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Carron Investment Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4187/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Gautam ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Krishnakumar, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 292B

…e is issued in the name of non-existing entity, entire assessment would be nullity in the eye of law. It has also been so held by Delhi high court in the case of Pr CIT v Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd. [2018].[2018] 90 taxmann.com 369/253 Taxman 409/402 ITR 21 (Delhi). 13. In the light of the above discussion, we are of the clear opinion that there was neither a legal basis nor jurisdiction with Respondent No.1 to issue the impugned notice under Section 148 A(b) and pass an order thereon and further to issue the impugned notice under Section 148 to a non-existing entity- "Uber India Research and Develop…

International Hospital Limited vs. DCIT Circle 12 (2)

ITA/116/2023HC Delhi26 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

…ITA 116/2023 & other connected matters Page 1 of 52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: September 11, 2024 Judgment pronounced on September 26, 2024 + ITA 116/2023 INTERNATIONAL HOSPITAL LIMITED .....Appellant Through: Mr. Simran Mehta, Advocate. versus DCIT CIRCLE 12 (2) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC along with Mr. Shivendra Singh and Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs. + W.P.(C) 13807/2022 RELIGARE ENTERPRISES LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR-IN- INTEREST OF RELIGARE SECURITIE…

ACIT Circle 1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M B Patil Construction Limited, Mumbai

ITA 98/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 40Section 44A

…um/2023 M/s. Patil Construction and Infrastructure Limited (M.B. Patil Constructions Limited since amalgamated) d) Reliance was placed on CIT vs. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd. [2016] 380 ITR 272 (Kar.), Pr. CIT vs. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P.) Ltd. 402 ITR 21 (Delhi), Spice Entertainment (supra), BDR Builders & Developers (P.) Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT 397 ITR 529 (Delhi), Rustagi Engineering Udyog (P.) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT 382ITR 443 (Delhi), Khurana Engineering Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT [2014] 364 ITR 600 (Guj), Takshashila Realties (P.) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT [2017] 77 taxmann.com 160 (Guj.), Alamelu Veerappan vs. ITO 257 Т…

M/S M.B.Patil Constructions Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

ITA 303/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 40Section 44A

Universal Comfort Products Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 499/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM ITA Nos. 498 & 499/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2017-18) Universal Comfort Products Limited DCIT, Circle-8(3)(1) (Since Amalgamated with Voltas Mumbai Limited) Voltas House A Block, 4th Floor, Vs. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Road, Chinchpokli (E), Mumbai-400 033 PAN/GIR No. AAACU 4770 G (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue by : Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha Date of Hearing : 18.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 25.10.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: The ca…

Universal Comfort Products Limited (Since Amalgamated With Voltas Limited ), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 498/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 80G

M/S. Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-4, Baroda

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2881/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm)

Section 292B

…Vs. ITO17; Chandreshbhai Jayantibhai Patel Vs. IOT18; and Alamelu Veerappan Vs. ITO19. 24. In the circumstances, though the respondents refer to decision of Delhi High Court in case of Sky Light Hospitality LLP Vs. 14 (2018) 90 taxmann.com 369/253 Taxman 409/402 ITR 21 (Delhi) 15 (2012) 247 CTR 500 (Delhi) 16 (2018) 92 taxmann.com 93 (SC) 17 (2019) 10 taxmann.com 233/260 Taxman 412 (Delhi) 18 (2019) 101 taxmann.com 362/261 Taxman 137 (Guj.) 19 (2018) taxmann.com 155/257Taxman 72 (Mad.) 17/18 WP. 950-2020 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 28(1), New Delhi 20 it would be of little avail for the responde…

Ppg Coating India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 13(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2168/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. (Tp) No.2168/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ppg Coatings India Pvt. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-13(1)(1) Ltd. Mumbai Vs. (Now Merged With Ppg Asian Paints Pvt. Ltd.) The Centrium Phoenix Market City, Lbs, Marg, Kurla West, Mumbai- 400070. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcs4378K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala Revenue By: Shri Samuel Pitta (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 25.01.2017 Pursuant To Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp)-02, Mumbai Passed 27.12.2016 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Senior Counsel For The Assessee Drew Our Attention To The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee, Which According To Him Is A Legal Issue & Which Need To Be Adjudicated First, Since If The Legal Issue Is Upheld Then, It Goes To The Root Of The Jurisdiction Of The Ao To Have Passed The Final Assessment Order. The Legal Issue Raised By Assessee Reads As Under;-

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Samuel Pitta (Sr. AR)

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…otice is issued in the name of non-existing entity, entire assessment would be nullity in the eye of law. It has also been so held by Delhi high court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P.) Ltd. [2018] 90 taxmann.com 369/253 Taxman 409/402 ITR 21 23. The Supreme Court in Spice Infotainment Ltd. v. CIT [IT Appeal No. 475 of 2011, dated 3-8- ITA (TP) No.2168/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 M/s. PPG Coatings India Pvt. Ltd. 2011] found that there is no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment of Delhi high court and it found no merits in the appeal and special leave petition and were dismissed a…

ITO 23 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sandhya Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and appeal/cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 7724/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi

Section 148

…y notice is issued in the name of non-existing entity, entire assessment would be nullity in the eye of law. It has also been so held by Delhi high court in the case of Pr CIT v. Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd [2018] 90 taxmann.com 369/253 Taxman 409/402 ITR 21.” 8. Respectfully following the above said decisions, it is fact on record that the order passed by the Assessing Officer in the non-existing firm which is dissolved and the business of the same was carried on by one of the partner in the proprietorship. Therefore, the assessment order passed M/s. Sandhya Enterprises & M/s. Sankeshwar Enterprises…

ITO 23 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sandhya Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and appeal/cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 7723/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi

Section 148

M/S. Centum Electronics Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed on the legal issue raised

ITA 946/BANG/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Centum Electronics Ltd. #44, Ground Floor, Deputy Commissioner Of Khb Industrial Area Vs. Income-Tax Yelahanka New Town Circle-2(1)(1) Bengaluru 560 106 Bengaluru Pan No : Aakcs7429L Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri S. Ramasubrammaniam, A.R. Respondent By : Shri Srinath Sadanala, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2022 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A) Bengaluru-2 Dated 28.2.2019 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Are Reproduced As Follows:- That The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) In 1. So Far It Is Prejudicial To The Interests Of The Appellant Is Bad & Erroneous In Law & Against The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Law & 2. On Facts In Justifying The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Passing An Order Against M/S. Solectron Ems India Ltd Even Though The Said Entity Does Not Exist On The Date Of The Passing The Order. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Law & 3. On Facts In Upholding The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Passing An Assessment Order Against A Non-Existing Person. 4. That The Order U/S 147 Is Without Jurisdiction.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubrammaniam, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, D.R

Section 10BSection 147Section 40

…orted in 223 ITR 809 (SC) ITA No.946 /Bang/2019 M/s. Centum Electronics Ltd., Bangalore Page 5 of 8 b) CIT & Another Vs. Intel Technology India (P) Ltd. reported in 380 ITR 272 (Kar) c) Principal CIT Vs. Nokia Solutions & Network India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 402 ITR 21 (Del) d) Emerald Company Ltd. Vs. ITO reported in 46 ITR (Trib) 619 2.5 The Ld.AR submitted that in all the above cases it is held that an assessment cannot be made on a non-existent company. It is clear from the reassessment order that the assessment had been made in the name of Solectron EMS India Ltd. which is a non-existent as on the date of p…

Genpact Infrastructure (Hyderabad) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6587/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 144CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

…8 xiii) PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (2017) 397 ITR 681 (Del) xiv) PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (SLP(C) Diary No. 14106 of 2018) xv) CIT vs. Micra India (P.) Ltd. (2015) 231 Taxman 809 xvi) PCIT vs. Nokia Solutions and Networks India Pvt. Ltd. 402 ITR 21 (Del. HC) xvii) CIT vs. Micron Steel (P.) Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 386 xix) BDR Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (2017) 397 ITR 529 (Del. HC) 6. The Ld. DR submitted that notice u/s 143(2) was validly served on the amalgamating company. The Ld. DR further submitted that the claim of the assessee of having given the assessee information of ap…

Genpact India Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 583/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri B. R. R. Kumargenpact India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit 12A, Ground Floor, Prakash Deep Circle-10(1) Building, 7 Tolstoy Marg, C. R. Building, Ip Estate, New Delhi New Delhi Aabce4461B Pin: 110002 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10ASection 115QSection 124Section 130(1)Section 139(5)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 292BSection 391Section 77A

…iii) PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (2017) 397 ITR 681 (Del) xiv) PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (SLP(C) Diary No. 14106 of 2018) xv) CIT vs. Micra India (P.) Ltd. (2015) 231 Taxman 809 xvi) PCIT vs. Nokia Solutions and Networks India Pvt. Ltd. 402 ITR 21 (Del. HC) xvii) CIT vs. Micron Steel (P.) Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 386 xix) BDR Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (2017) 397 ITR 529 (Del. HC) 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee at any point of time never informed the Assessing Officer as regards to amalgamation. The letter dated 18.04.2016 is addressed to Member (IT), CBDT and not t…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited

C.A. No.-005409-005409 - 2019Supreme Court25 Jul 2019

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 92C

…Intel Technology India (P) Ltd17 - PCIT v Nokia Solutions & Network India (P) Ltd. (“Nokia Solutions”)18 - Spice Entertainment 16 (1990) 186 ITR 278 (SC) 17 [2016] 380 ITR 272 (Kar.) 18 [2018] 402 ITR 21 (Del) 12 - Similarly, a notice to the amalgamating company, subsequent to the amalgamation becoming effective and despite the fact of the amalgamation having been brought to the notice of the assessing officer, is void ab initio as held in the following decisions: - BDR Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v ACIT19 - Rustagi Engineering…

Ambey Construction Company, Bathinda vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bathinda

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 121/ASR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 121/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ambey Construction Company, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of #21605, Street No. 7, Power House Income Tax, Circle-1, Road, Bathinda Bathinda (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aanfa7199K

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh GuptaFor Respondent: Sh. M. P. Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 282Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR Before Sh. N. S. Saini, Accountant Member And Sh. N. K. Choudhry, Judicial Member ITA No. 121/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ambey Construction Company, Vs Asstt. Commissioner of #21605, Street No. 7, Power House Income Tax, Circle-1, Road, Bathinda Bathinda (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AANFA7199K Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta Revenue by : Sh. M. P. Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing :19.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2019 ORDER Per N. S. Saini, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), Bathinda dated…