How many judgments cite Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT?

79 judgments on BharatTax cite Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT (186 ITR 278), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 144, Section 292B, Section 250.

Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT

186 ITR 278Supreme Court of India1990#1437 most cited

What is Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Upon amalgamation, the amalgamating company ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. Therefore, any assessment or proceeding initiated against a non-existent amalgamating company is invalid as it is no longer considered a 'person' under the Income-tax Act.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT · amalgamation · non-existent entity assessment · transferor company ceases to exist · Section 2(31) person · Section 147 · Section 148 · assessment validity · Companies Act scheme of arrangement · post-amalgamation assessment

Also reported as

53 Taxmann 92

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 144 Section 292B Section 250 Section 148A Section 151

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

transferor company section 170 section 39 section 2(31)section 2(1a)scheme of arrangement transferee company resulting company amalgamation section 292b doctrine of merger faceless assessment scheme

Judgments citing Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT

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

…Appliances Co. Ltd. (supra) was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex 19 ITA Nos.303 & 98/Mum/2023 M/s. Patil Construction and Infrastructure Limited (M.B. Patil Constructions Limited since amalgamated) Court in the case of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs. CIT 186 ITR 278 (SC). Briefly, the facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant, Saraswati Industrial Syndicate, was a limited company carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of sugar and machinery for sugar mills and other industries. Another company, namely, the Indian Sugar and General Engineering Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "t…

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

…Technology India Ltd.13 Karnataka high court has held, if a statutory 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 Vs. 8 (1990) 186 ITR 278 (SC) 9 (2018) 12 ITR-OL 134 (SC) 10 (2015) 370 ITR 288 11 (2015) 59 taxmann.com 470/233 Taxman 120/372 ITR 386 (Del.) (Mag.) 12 (2015) 57 taxmann.com 163/231 Taxman 809 (Delhi) 13 (2016) 380 UTE 272 (Kar.) 16 / 18 WP. 950-2020 Nokia Solutions and Network India (P) Ltd.14 23. The Supreme Court in Spice Infotainment Ltd. Vs. CIT15 found that there…

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

The ACIT, Central-2, Indore vs. M/S. Keti Construction (India) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 63/IND/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Keti Construction (India) Central-2, बनाम/ Limited, Indore Indore. Vs. (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Aabck 5930 D Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Ajay Tulsian, Ca Date Of Hearing 09.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023

Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 68

…on, Ld. AR placed reliance on certain judicial pronouncements, mainly the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited 416 ITR 613. Other decisions referred by Ld. AR are: (a) Sarswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. (1990) 186 ITR 278 (SC) (b) Spice Infortainment Ltd. (SC) Civil Appeal No. 285 of 2014 (c) Spice Entertainment Ltd., ITA No. 465 and 476 of 2011 order dated 03.08.2011 (Delhi HC) (d) CIT vs. Indu Surveyors & Loss Assessors Pvt.Ltd. in ITA 366/2013 dt. 15.10.2015 (Delhi HC) Page 6 of 13 ACIT Central 2, Indore. Vs. M/s. Keti Construction (India) Limited, Indore.…

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

…Technology India Ltd.13 Karnataka high court has held, if a statutory 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 Vs. 8 (1990) 186 ITR 278 (SC) 9 (2018) 12 ITR- OL 134 (SC) 10 (2015) 370 ITR 288 11 (2015) 59 taxmann.com 470/233 Taxman 120/372 ITR 386 (Del.) (Mag.) 12 (2015) 57 taxmann.com 7 Siemens Limited 163/231 Taxman 809 (Delhi) 13 (2016) 380 UTE 272 (Kar.) 16/18 WP. 950-2020 Nokia Solutions and Network India (P) Ltd.14 23. The Supreme Court in Spice Infotainment Ltd. Vs. CIT…

Abbott India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed

ITA 2032/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narender Kumar Chaudhary, Jm Ita No. 2032/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal,ARFor Respondent: Shri Byomkesh Pradipta Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHAUDHARY, JM ITA No. 2032/MUM/2014 (Assessment Year2009-10) Abbott India Ltd. (as successor to ‘Solvey Pharma ACIT Range-7(2) India Ltd’) Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Suraj Prakash, 1 st Floor, 86, Vs. Karve Road, Shankar Ghanekar Marg, Mumbai-400020 Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAACB5170B Assessee by : Shri Madhur Agrawal,AR Revenue by : Shri Byomkesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, DR Date of hearing: 15.06.2023 Date of pronouncement : 12.07.2023 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARIS…

Abbott India Ltd.(Solvay Pharma India Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl.C.I.T. RG.7(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed

ITA 7778/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narender Kumar Chaudhary, Jm Ita No. 2032/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal,ARFor Respondent: Shri Byomkesh Pradipta Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)

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

…9 (SC). 10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., 416 ITR 613 (SC) after taking note of its own earlier decision in the case of CIT Vs. Infotainment Ltd. 12 ITR-OL 134 (SC) and Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs. CIT 186 ITR 278 (SC) on this issue held as under: - “33. In the present case, despite the fact that the assessing officer was informed of the amalgamating company having ceased to exist as a result of the approved scheme of amalgamation, the jurisdictional notice was issued only in its name. The basis on which jurisdiction was invoked was fundamentally at odds…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Tinsukia, Tinsukia vs. M/S. Brooke Bond India Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 99/GTY/2000[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Dec 2022AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble]

For Appellant: Smt. Harshita Jain on behalf of NituFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT, D/R

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80G

….) 14 cannot be applied for treating the cost of the asset acquired in accordance with the schemes as deemed profits under the said sections. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Limited vs. CIT, reported in 186 ITR 278 (SC) that when two companies are merged and are so joined as to form a third company or one is absorbed into the other or blended with another, the amalgamating company loses its entity. Under an order of amalgamation made on the basis of the High Court's order the amalgamating company ceases to be in existence in the eye of law and it effaces it…

ACIT- CC- 3(3), Cr- 3, Mumb vs. M/S. Candor Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd.(Erstwhile 'Bhadrawati Ispat & Energy Ltd'.), Mumbai

ITA 2561/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2561/Mum/2021 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2560/Mum/2021 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Candor Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. Inocome Tax-Cc-3(3), (Erstwhile Bhadrawati Central Range-3, बनाम/ Ispat & Energy Ltd) R. No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air Vs. 404, 4Th Floor, Hub Town India Building, Nariman Solaris, N. S. Phadke Point, Mumbai-400021 Marg, Mumbai-400 069 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aadcr1238F (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 697/Mum/2022 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 698/Mum/2022 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Candor Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. (Erstwhile Income Tax-Cc-3(3), Bhadrawati Ispat & Energy Central Range-3, बनाम/ Ltd) R. No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Vs. 404, 4Th Floor, Hub Town Air India Building, Solaris, N. S. Phadke Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 069 Mumbai-400021 (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay V. DeshmukhFor Respondent: Shri Mani Jain & Prateek

Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM, & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2561/Mum/2021 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) And 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2560/Mum/2021 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner of M/s Candor Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. Inocome Tax-CC-3(3), (Erstwhile Bhadrawati Central Range-3, बनाम/ Ispat & Energy Ltd) R. No. 1923, 19th Floor, Air Vs. 404, 4th floor, Hub Town India Building, Nariman Solaris, N. S. phadke Point, Mumbai-400021 Marg, Mumbai-400 069 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AADCR1238F (अ…

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

…isting entity is a substantive illegality and would not be procedural violation of Section 292(b) of the Act. The Supreme Court in its aforesaid decision, has quoted an extract from its decision in Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd v. CIT [1990] 53 Taxman 92/186 ITR 278. The Supreme Court has also referred to decision of Delhi high court in the case of CIT v. Spice Enfotainment Ltd [2018] 12 ITR-OL 134 (SC) and observed that in its decision Delhi high court had held that assessment order passed against non- existing company would be void. Such defect cannot be treated as procedural defect and mere participation…

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

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Mahaluxmi Marketing Pvt Ltd

In the result, the substantial questions of law are

ITAT/51/2020HC Calcutta07 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

For Appellant: Mr. S. N. Dutta, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Agnibesh Sengupta, Adv

Section 260ASection 68Section 69

…ation of trading liability can be taxed in the hands of the assessee company. In this regard it would be beneficial to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [1990] 186 ITR 278 (SC). In the said decision the Hon’ble Supreme Court has discussed the law on the subject i.e. after an order of amalgamation is approved by the concerned High Court. It would be beneficial to refer to paragraph 5 of the judgment which reads as follows: “Generally, where only one company is involved in change and the rights of the shareholders…

M/S I G Petrochemical Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1317/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(24)(vd)Section 263Section 28Section 41(1)

…ITA No.1317/Bang/2018 M/s. I.G. Petrochemicals Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. I.G. Petrochemicals Ltd. D-4, Jyothi Complex Deputy Commissioner of 134/1, Infantry Road Income-tax Vs. Bengaluru 560 001 Circle-3(1)(1) Bengaluru PAN NO : AAACI4115R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri S. Parthasarathi, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 10.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 21.01.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOU…

ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Pride Residency (P) Ltd. (in the Case of Spn Milk Products Inds. P.Ltd.), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4182/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Dhingra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. T Kipgen, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 264

…nt, the assessment has to be done in the hands of the amalgamated company. 6. Ld. CIT(A) considered the contentions raised by the assessee and also referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs.CIT, 186 ITR 278, wherein it was held that when two companies amalgamate and managing to one, the transferor company loses its entity as the decisions to have its business, and their respective rights and liabilities are determined under the scheme of amalgamation, but the corporate entity of the transferor company ceases to exist with effect from the date the am…

Arpeo Data Research Pvt Ltd. (Now Merged With White Research Pvt Ltd), Mumbai vs. CIT(A)-24, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7066/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 230Section 230(1)Section 230(5)

…ured by invoking the provisions of sec. 292B of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi while concluding as hereinabove had relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT [1990] 53 taxmann.com 92/186 ITR 278, wherein it was observed, that it was trite law that on amalgamation, the amalgamating company ceases to exist in the eyes of law. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while concluding as hereinabove had observed as under:— "The question is whether on the amalgamation of the India Sugar Company with the appellant Company, the Indian Sugar Company continued…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Shri I Mahabaleshwarappa

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal

ITA/561/2013HC Karnataka16 Jun 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 260Section 260A

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR I.T.A. NO.561 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: SHRI. I. MAHABALESHWARAPPA BY LEGAL HEIR MANU ITTINA ITTINA HOUSE, SARJAPUR ROAD KAIKONDANAHALLI, CARMELRAM POST, BANGALORE-560005. ... RES…

Pr Commissioner of vs. M/S Quantech Global Services Ltd

ITA/439/2018HC Karnataka04 Feb 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 143(2)Section 260Section 268

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA ITA NO.439/2018 BETWEEN: 1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-1 TAX-7, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-16(3) BANGALORE …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.SANMATHI E.I., ADV.) AND: M/S.QUANTECH GLOBAL SERVICES LTD., (SINCE MERGED WITH WIPRO LTD.,) DODDAKANNELLI, SARJAPUR ROAD BENGALURU AAACQ0681N … RESPONDENT (BY SRI.S.GANE…

M/S. Anjani Technoplast Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1865/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ice that the assessment was completed without the learned Assessing Officer properly assuming the jurisdiction. Reliance is placed on the decisions reported inPCIT vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (2019) 416 ITR 0613 (SC), Saraswati Industrials Syndicate Ltd vs CIT 186 ITR 278 (SC); CIT v BMA Capfin Ltd., [2018] 100 taxmann.com 329 (Del.) affirmed in [2018] 100 taxmann.com 330 (SC), CIT v Dimension Apparels Pvt. Ltd, 370 ITR 288 (Del) affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court vide Civil Appeal No. 3125 of 2015; Spice Entertainment Ltd. vs. CIT [2012] 247 CTR (Del.) 500 (Del.) approved by Apex Court by dismissing SLP of revenue i…

Om Praaksh Singh, Ranchi vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 361/RAN/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Om Prakash Singh Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi Sankalp, East Jail Road, Ranchi- 834001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agkps0300D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manjit Verma, A/RFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Mohanti, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234CSection 263Section 37(1)

…try tax (AY 2002-03 to 2004-05). It has not been disallowed u/s 43B in the assessment. g. Prior period expenses of Rs. 94,683/-, debited to the profit/loss a/c has not been disallowed. h. Hon'ble Apex Court in the ease of M/s Sarswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd.186 ITR 278 has held that "The High Court was in error in holding that even after amalgamation of the two companies; the transferor company did not become non -existent. Instead it continued its entity in blended form with the appellant company. The High Court's' view that on amalgamation there is no complete destruction of corporate personality of one with…