INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 13(1), DELHI V. JAI MAA BHAWANI OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., DELHI

MA 360/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Jai Maa Bhawani Overseas Pvt. Ltd., which had been struck off from the Registrar of Companies but was later restored by an NCLT order. Initially, the Tribunal had allowed the company's appeals based on its non-existence at the time of the assessment years in question (2012-13 & 2013-14). However, upon discovering the restoration order during the hearing of the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue, the Tribunal decided to recall its earlier order. The Tribunal also noted the concealment of the restoration fact by the assessee in previous proceedings and imposed a cost for this concealment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 36972 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Other Referred Cases: ACIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi Vs. ROC & Ors. (Jai Maa Bhawani Overseas Pvt. Ltd.)
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHILPI SANWARIYA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHANKAR GUPTA

Judgement Text

"P a g e | 1 MA Nos. 358 & 360/Del/2024 Jai Maa Bhawani Overseas (AYs: 2012-13 & 2013-14) THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. Nos. 358 & 360/Del/2024 (Arising out of ITA No.193 & 228/Del/2022) (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Income Tax Officer, Ward 13(1), Room No. 306, C.R. Building Delhi Delhi 110002 Vs. Jai Maa Bhawani Overseas Pvt. Limited B-5/263, Sector 03, Rohini, Delhi Delhi- 110085 ̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AABCJ0239L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Ms. Shilpi Sanwariya, Adv. Respondent by : Dr. Shankar Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.03.2025 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue seeking recalling of the order dated 22.08.2024 passed by the Tribunal are heard in presence of the respective parties. In fact, the fact placed before us by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee at the time of hearing of the earlier appeals is this that the assessee’s company was struck off from the role of Registrar of the Companies on 02.09.2018 and P a g e | 2 MA Nos. 358 & 360/Del/2024 Jai Maa Bhawani Overseas (AYs: 2012-13 & 2013-14) therefore, the assessment orders passed admittedly in the name of non- existing company are liable to be quashed. Same fact was placed in regard to all the appeals preferred by the assessee before us in ITA Nos. 193, 228 & 229/Del/2022. Thus, having regard to this particular aspect of the matter and upon perusal of the documents in support of such submission as appearing at page 1 of the paper book filed by the assessee, those appeals were allowed. 2. Today at the time of hearing of the instant application the Ld. DR furnished an order dated 19.02.2020 in the matter of ACIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi Vs. ROC & Ors. (Jai Maa Bhawani Overseas Pvt. Ltd.) passed by the Ld. National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, whereby and whereunder the ROC concerned was directed to restore the name of the company of the assessee to the Registrar of Companies. In that view of the matter the Ld. DR prays for recalling of the order dated 22.08.2024 passed by us. After protracted hearing, the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee sought for adjournment though no application to that effect has been filed. We note that it appears from the records that previously on two occasions none appeared for the assessee when the matter was called for hearing. Thus, such prayer of adjournment at the midst of the matter made by the Ld. AR is rejected. 3. However, having regard to the order passed by the Ld. NCLT dated 19.02.2020 we deem it fit and proper to recall the order passed by the Tribunal on 22.08.2024. The same is, thus, recalled. The registry is directed to list the matter on 22.04.2025 for hearing. P a g e | 3 MA Nos. 358 & 360/Del/2024 Jai Maa Bhawani Overseas (AYs: 2012-13 & 2013-14) 4. However, we note that this particular aspect of restoration of the name of assessee’s company to the Registrar of Companies was concealed before us when these appeals were heard by us on 08.08.2024. In fact, much before the hearing of the matter, the Ld. NCLT passed such order of restoration on 19.02.2020. We also note that inspite of such order having been passed by the Ld. NCLT the appeal being No. 193 & 228/Del/2022 were filed before us raising the ground of assessment order being passed in the name of non-existing company. We deprecate this practice and we note that this is nothing but concealment of fact and attempt to mislead the Bench by the assessee and therefore, we are constrained to impose cost of Rs.25,000/- on the assessee which is to be deposited to the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund (PMNRF) within 7 days from date, the proof whereof to be furnished before the Registry by the assessee positively by 22.04.2025. 5. The miscellaneous applications filed by the Revenue are, thus, allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.03.2025. Sd/- (Avdhesh Kumar Mishra) Sd/- (Madhumita Roy) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 26.03.2025 PS: Rohit "