← 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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Olive Bar & Kitchen Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6255/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriolive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. V/S. Acit, Circle-13(1)(1), बनाम Ltd. Mumbai 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Maharashtra-400020 Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Dcit, Circle-13(1)(2), V/S. Olive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. Mumbai बनाम Ltd. R. No. 218, Aayakar 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Bhavan, M K Road, Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Maharashtra-400020 Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी ..

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh RajoraFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pmnani
Section 250Section 35D(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(lit)Section 37(1)

from Sussegado Bar & Kitchen (P) Ltd. has been duly offered for tax in assessee’s return. A copy of the scheme of amalgamation and arrangement between the assessee and Sussegado P a g e | 10 ITA Nos. 5924 & 6255/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Olive Bar and Kitchen Pvt. Ltd. Bar & Kitchen

Olive Bar and Kitchen Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 13(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5924/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriolive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. V/S. Acit, Circle-13(1)(1), बनाम Ltd. Mumbai 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Maharashtra-400020 Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Dcit, Circle-13(1)(2), V/S. Olive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. Mumbai बनाम Ltd. R. No. 218, Aayakar 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Bhavan, M K Road, Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Maharashtra-400020 Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी ..

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh RajoraFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pmnani
Section 250Section 35D(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(lit)Section 37(1)

from Sussegado Bar & Kitchen (P) Ltd. has been duly offered for tax in assessee’s return. A copy of the scheme of amalgamation and arrangement between the assessee and Sussegado P a g e | 10 ITA Nos. 5924 & 6255/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Olive Bar and Kitchen Pvt. Ltd. Bar & Kitchen

Mentor Graphics (India) Pvt. Ltd (Calypto Design Systems India Pvt Ltd- Amalgamated Company), New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-16(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 842/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2016-17 Mentor Graphics (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, (Calypto Design Systems India Pvt. Circle-16(1), Ltd. – Amalgamated Company), New Delhi. P-24, Green Park Extension, New Delhi – 110 016. Pan: Aabcm5494Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate & Shri Ankit Sahani, Advocate & Shri Yishu Goel, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.01.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 30.03.2021 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C (13) R.W.S. 143(3A & 143(3B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mentor Graphics (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, (Calypto Design Systems India Pvt. Circle-16(1), Ltd. – Amalgamated Company), New Delhi. P-24, Green Park Extension, New Delhi – 110 016. PAN: AABCM5494Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate & Shri Ankit Sahani ... Systems India Private Limited. 4. Pendency of rectification and refunds eligible to Calypto Design Systems India Private Limited and considering as per Scheme of amalgamation, the tax liability (if any) of Calypto Design Systems India Private Limited will be borne by Mentor Graphics (India) Private Limited, the interest of Revenue

Aditya Sharma, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-19, New Delhi

ITA 3621/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanita Nos. 3621, 3622, 3623, 3624, 3625 & 3626/Del/2018 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Srs Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii (Merged With M/S Btl Industries Faridabad, Haryana (Later Merged With Btl Investment & Securities Ltd. Which Is Now Known As M/S Btl Holding Co. Ltd.) C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi – 49 (Pan: Aaics9912Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Srs International Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii (Merged With M/S Btl Industries Ltd. Faridabad, Haryana (Later Merged With Btl Investment & Securities Ltd. Which Is Now Known As M/S Btl Holding Co. Ltd.) C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi – 49 (Pan: Aalcs2670Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv., Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. & Sh. Saksham Agrawal, Ca Respondent By : Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv., Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Dhami, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153A(1)(b)

Court dated 16.03.2012 passed in CO.PET.519/2011 in the matter of M/s BTL Impex (India ) limited and Ors. relating to approving the Scheme of Amalgamation of BTL Impex (India) Limited, SRS Buildicon Private Limited, SRS International Limited, BTL Industries Limited and many other companies, by holding as under

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(2), Delhi, I.P.Estate vs. Bureau Veritas Consumer Products Services(India) Pvt. Ltd., Lajpat Nagar

ITA 3158/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

second and subsequent years 7 Claim of 03 deduction for bad debts 8 Carry - forward and adjustment of Capital Loss of amalgamating 4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 in ITA No.5417/Del/2017 are as under:- 1.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances ... view of the different rulings and question of law involved appeal is filed. 5) Carry forward and adjustment of Long Term Capital Loss of amalgamating company with the amalgamated company ie. the assessee company.. The learned CIT(Appeals)erred in deleting the addition of the LTCG ie allowed

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Hinduja National Power Corporation Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

ITA 235/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.235/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Assistant M/S. Hinduja National Power Commissioner Of Income Vs. Corporation Ltd. Tax, Circle 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch2426D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K. A. Sai Prasad, C.A. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr.

For Appellant: Shri K. A. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32ASection 92C

April, 2018.] (2) If any new asset acquired and installed by the assessee is sold or otherwise transferred, except in connection with the amalgamation or demerger, within a period of five years from the date of its installation, the amount of deduction allowed under sub-section (1) [or sub-section ... gains, arising on account of transfer of such new asset. (3) Where the new asset is sold or otherwise transferred in connection with the amalgamation or demerger within a period of five years from the date of its installation, the provisions of sub-section (2) shall apply to the amalgamated

Shri Ram Chander, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

ITA 3622/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanita Nos. 3621, 3622, 3623, 3624, 3625 & 3626/Del/2018 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Srs Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii (Merged With M/S Btl Industries Faridabad, Haryana (Later Merged With Btl Investment & Securities Ltd. Which Is Now Known As M/S Btl Holding Co. Ltd.) C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi – 49 (Pan: Aaics9912Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Srs International Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii (Merged With M/S Btl Industries Ltd. Faridabad, Haryana (Later Merged With Btl Investment & Securities Ltd. Which Is Now Known As M/S Btl Holding Co. Ltd.) C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi – 49 (Pan: Aalcs2670Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv., Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. & Sh. Saksham Agrawal, Ca Respondent By : Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv., Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Dhami, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153A(1)(b)

Court dated 16.03.2012 passed in CO.PET.519/2011 in the matter of M/s BTL Impex (India ) limited and Ors. relating to approving the Scheme of Amalgamation of BTL Impex (India) Limited, SRS Buildicon Private Limited, SRS International Limited, BTL Industries Limited and many other companies, by holding as under