← All Phrases

“demerger”

Mergers & RestructuringSection 2(19AA)Section 2(19AA)492 judgments

The decision most relied on for demerger is CIT v. Sonata Software Ltd. (21 Taxmann.com 23), cited in 54 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on demerger

CIT v. Sonata Software Ltd.
21 Taxmann.com 23 · 2012 · High Court
54
citing judgments

The case clarifies the negative conditions for Section 10A exemption, requiring an industrial undertaking not be formed by splitting up an existing business or using previously used machinery. It also establishes that tax benefits under provisions like Section 80J and 80IA attach to the undertaking itself, allowing successor entities to claim the unexpired benefit period.

CIT v. Micra India (P) Ltd.
231 Taxmann 809 · 2015 · High Court
42
citing judgments

An assessment order passed against a transferor company that has ceased to exist due to amalgamation or demerger is non est in the eyes of law and void, as this constitutes a jurisdictional error not curable under Section 292B of the Income-tax Act.

Electrocast Sales India Ltd. v. DCIT
170 ITD 507 · 2018 · ITAT
30
citing judgments

A scheme of amalgamation or demerger approved by the High Court, having considered public interest, cannot be disturbed by the revenue authorities solely on the ground that the assessee is not entitled to certain benefits like those under Section 72A of the Income Tax Act.

8.Ace Multi Axes System Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
367 ITR 266 · 2014 · High Court
26
citing judgments

The eligibility for deductions under sections 80-IB and 80-IA, and related issues like the initial assessment year, demerger, and resulting company status, are significant considerations in the context of company restructuring and tax benefits.

Rustagi Engineering Udyog (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
382 ITR 443 · 2016 · High Court
25
citing judgments

An amalgamation that has been brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer is void ab initio, meaning it is invalid from the beginning.

Dalmia Power Ltd. v. ACIT
420 ITR 339 · 2020 · Supreme Court
21
citing judgments

Once a scheme of arrangement or amalgamation has been sanctioned by a competent court and due notice has been issued to the income tax department, the binding nature of the scheme cannot be challenged during its implementation, as it attains statutory force.

EID Parry India's v. CIT
23 Taxmann.com 348 · 2012 · High Court
20
citing judgments

Unabsorbed depreciation of an amalgamating company cannot be added to the written down value of assets in the hands of the amalgamated company. The Supreme Court has dismissed a special leave petition against a High Court decision on this point, implicitly upholding this proposition.

Premji Khimraj Shah v. ITO
118 ITR 216 · 1979 · Reported
11
citing judgments

Succession to business requires the successor to take over the whole or substantially the whole of the predecessor's business and continue it. A successor to only a part of the business, resulting from disintegration, is not considered a successor to the original business.

Judgments citing demerger

Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward -3(1), Chennai vs. Tsl Techno Services Limited(Ttk Healthcare Private Limited ), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1772/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1772/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Income Tax Officer, Tsl Techno Services Limited, Corporate Ward -3(1), V. (Ttk Healthcare Private Ltd), Chennai – 600 034. No.6, Cathedral Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai – 600 086. [Pan: Aabct-3312-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 32(1)

details. The case was transferred to the assessing officer on 11.03.2022 from NFAC, since this involves the issue of restructuring i.e. Merger, Amalgamation, demerger etc. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s.143(3) on 21.09.2022 by disallowing /adding as under: “1) Disallowance of Logo charges Rs.2

ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs. Aia Engineering Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 532/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 397/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Aia Engineering Limited, Dcit Vs. 115, Gvmm Estate, Odhav Road, Circle-1(1)(1), Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415 Ahmedabad Pan : Aabca 2777 J आयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 532/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Aia Engineering Limited, Acit, Vs. 115, Gvmm Estate, Odhav Road, Circle-1(1)(1), Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415 Ahmedabad Pan : Aabca 2777 J अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr Dr & Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2024 सुनवाई क" क" तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.10.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr DR &
Section 154Section 250Section 32

section 47 or section 170 or to the amalgamating company and the amalgamated company in the case of amalgamation, or to the demerged company and the resulting company in the case of demerger, as the case may be, shall not exceed in any previous year the deduction calculated ... prescribed rates as if the succession or the amalgamation or the demerger, as the case may be, had not taken place, and such deduction shall be apportioned between the predecessor and the successor, or the amalgamating company and the amalgamated company, or the demerged company and the resulting company

M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), Chennai

Appeal stand allowed to the extent of correct adoption of cost of investments

ITA 1215/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1211/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Acit M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd. बनाम/ Corporate Circle-3(1), 21, Patullos Road, Mount Road, Vs. Chennai. Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3116-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1215/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd. Acit बनाम/ 21, Patullos Road, Mount Road, Corporate Circle-3(1), Vs. Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3116-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. Ar (Virtual) " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. AR (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to grant TDS credit of Rs.52,08,511/- being the TDS relating to demerged undertaking taken over by the Appellant but relating to the period from the date of demerger to the actual effective demerger taking place. Income for which ... Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the TDS credit of Rs.52,08,571/- are relatable to the undertaking whose income after demerger belongs to was included in the hands of the Appellant and hence the corresponding TDS should also have been given credit in the hands

ACIT, Nungambakkam, Chennai vs. Sundaram Finance Holdings Limited, Chennai

Appeal stand allowed to the extent of correct adoption of cost of investments

ITA 1211/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1211/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Acit M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd. बनाम/ Corporate Circle-3(1), 21, Patullos Road, Mount Road, Vs. Chennai. Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3116-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1215/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd. Acit बनाम/ 21, Patullos Road, Mount Road, Corporate Circle-3(1), Vs. Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3116-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. Ar (Virtual) " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. AR (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to grant TDS credit of Rs.52,08,511/- being the TDS relating to demerged undertaking taken over by the Appellant but relating to the period from the date of demerger to the actual effective demerger taking place. Income for which ... Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the TDS credit of Rs.52,08,571/- are relatable to the undertaking whose income after demerger belongs to was included in the hands of the Appellant and hence the corresponding TDS should also have been given credit in the hands