← All Phrases

“amalgamation”

Mergers & RestructuringSection 2(1B)Section 2(1B)1,456 judgments

The decision most relied on for amalgamation is CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. (348 ITR 302), cited in 540 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on amalgamation

CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.
348 ITR 302 · 2012 · Supreme Court
540
citing judgments

Goodwill, whether arising from an amalgamation or a slump sale, is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act. While the assessee must prove the existence and valuation of such goodwill, it is recognized as a depreciable asset.

PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.
416 ITR 613 · 2019 · Supreme Court
308
citing judgments

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.

Spice Infotainment Ltd. v. CIT
247 CTR 500 · 2012 · High Court
114
citing judgments

An assessment framed in the name of a company that has ceased to exist due to amalgamation is invalid, even if the amalgamated company participated in the proceedings. Such a defect cannot be cured under section 292B of the Income-tax Act.

PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors Pvt. Ltd.
443 ITR 194 · 2022 · Supreme Court
95
citing judgments

An assessment framed by the Assessing Officer in the name of a defunct transferor company is valid if the assessee failed to intimate the AO about the merger or amalgamation.

Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT
186 ITR 278 · 1990 · Supreme Court
79
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Amalgamations Ltd.
238 ITR 963 · 1998 · High Court
73
citing judgments

An assessment order can be deemed erroneous due to the Assessing Officer's non-application of mind or inadequate inquiry, warranting revision under Section 263. However, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax must establish the order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, and cannot use this power merely to direct further inquiries without such a finding.

Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Incometax/Income-tax Officer v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd.
137 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · High Court
60
citing judgments

Goodwill arising on amalgamation is entitled to depreciation. This principle is established by multiple High Court decisions.

Beverages 331 ITR 192 (Del) B.Raveendran Pillai v. CIT
237 Taxmann 230 · 2016 · High Court
59
citing judgments

Goodwill arising on amalgamation is an intangible asset qualifying for depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act.

Judgments citing amalgamation

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Haldwani vs. Delta Power Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., (Now), Delta Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Accordingly. This Revenue’s appeal ITA Nos. 5543/Del/2018 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun02 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Delta Power Solution Circle-1, (India) Pvt. Ltd., Haldwani Plot No. 38, Phase-1, Sector-5, Iie, Pantnagar, Rudrapur, Distt. Us Nagar, Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand Pan: Aaccd5896N (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No. 38/Del/2019 [Arise Out Of Ita No.5543/Del/2018] Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Dcit, Delta Power Solution (India) Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Plot No. 38, Phase-1, Sector- Haldwani 5, Iie, Pantnagar, Rudrapur, Distt. Us Nagar, Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand Pan: Aaccd5896N (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Delta Power Solution (India) Acit, Haldwani Pvt. Ltd. (Now, Delta Electronics India Pvt. Ltd.) Plot No. 43, Sector-35, Hsiidc, Gurgaon Pan: Aaccd5896N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

justified in rejecting M/s Crompton Greaves Ltd. As a comparable on the basis of existence of an event of amalgamation which cannot be verified, ignoring the findings of this office. 4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in directing to include M/s Nutech Engineers and Power Systems ... lower appellate discussion rejecting M/s. Crompton Greaves Ltd. from the array of valid comparables since having undergone an extraordinary event of amalgamation of a subsidiary, in its books of account in the 3 | P a g e ITA Nos.5543/Del/2018; 3/DDN/2024 & C.O. No.38/Del/2019 relevant previous year. We wish to make

DCIT, Circle-1, Haldwani vs. Delta Power Solution India Pvt. Ltd., U S Nagar

Accordingly. This Revenue’s appeal ITA Nos. 5543/Del/2018 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5543/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Dehradun02 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Delta Power Solution Circle-1, (India) Pvt. Ltd., Haldwani Plot No. 38, Phase-1, Sector-5, Iie, Pantnagar, Rudrapur, Distt. Us Nagar, Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand Pan: Aaccd5896N (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No. 38/Del/2019 [Arise Out Of Ita No.5543/Del/2018] Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Dcit, Delta Power Solution (India) Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Plot No. 38, Phase-1, Sector- Haldwani 5, Iie, Pantnagar, Rudrapur, Distt. Us Nagar, Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand Pan: Aaccd5896N (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Delta Power Solution (India) Acit, Haldwani Pvt. Ltd. (Now, Delta Electronics India Pvt. Ltd.) Plot No. 43, Sector-35, Hsiidc, Gurgaon Pan: Aaccd5896N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

justified in rejecting M/s Crompton Greaves Ltd. As a comparable on the basis of existence of an event of amalgamation which cannot be verified, ignoring the findings of this office. 4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in directing to include M/s Nutech Engineers and Power Systems ... lower appellate discussion rejecting M/s. Crompton Greaves Ltd. from the array of valid comparables since having undergone an extraordinary event of amalgamation of a subsidiary, in its books of account in the 3 | P a g e ITA Nos.5543/Del/2018; 3/DDN/2024 & C.O. No.38/Del/2019 relevant previous year. We wish to make

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bhushan Steel Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1470/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2006-07] S. C. Johnson Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 5Th Floor, Plot No.68, Circle-7(1), Sector-44, Gurugram, New Delhi Haryana-122003. Pan-Aaacl3128M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2007-08] S. C. Johnson Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 5Th Floor, Plot No.68, Circle-22(2), Sector-44, Gurugram, New Delhi Haryana-122003. Pan-Aaacl3128M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2008-09] S. C. Johnson Pvt. Ltd., Vs Add.Cit, 5Th Floor, Plot No.68, Special Range-8, Sector-44, Gurugram, New Delhi Haryana-122003. Pan-Aaacl3128M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri K. M. Gupta, Adv. & Ms. Shruti Khimta, Ar Respondent By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 02.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.08.2025

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80I

section 115.JB of the Act. 3.2 That Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the findings of the Ld. AO that the Scheme of Amalgamation is in the nature of "Pooling of Interest" method as against the appellant's claim of "Purchase" method which was approved by the auditors ... company and was also in accordance with the scheme of amalgamation as approved by the Hon'ble High Court. 3.3 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in concluding that the Ld. AO is empowered to tinker with the Scheme

Plr Textiles Ltd., Chennai vs. The ACIT, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 133/CHNY/2021[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 133/Chny/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 Plr Textiles Ltd., The Acit, 8K, Century Plaza, V. Corporate Circle -5(2), 560-562, Mount Road, Chennai – 641 034. Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaacp-6536-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, Vide Ita No.153/Cit(A)-3/2018-19For The Assessment Year 2005-06, Dated 13.03.2020. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 346 Days In Appeal Filed By The Assessee, For Which Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Reasons For Delay Has Been Filed. After Considering The Petition Filed By The Assessee, Reason For Delay In Filing The Appeal Was Due To Covid-19 Pandemic & Also Hearing Both The :-2-:

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

Fixed Assets Schedule in Paper Book-I). :-8-: ITA. No:133/Chny/2021  The assessee company PLR Textiles ltd was incorporated on 01.07.1996 and KOIL /PLI amalgamated with PLR Textiles ltd with effect from 01.07.1997. The Order of the High Court confirming the amalgamation on 29.04.1998 with effect from ... paper book.  Under section 49(1)(iii)(e) read with section 47(vi) of the Act, the cost of acquisition of assets on amalgamation in the hands of the assessee, is the cost of acquisition of the Transferor Company(KOIL/PLI), which as explained above is Rs.6.07 Crores applying provisions