DCIT (IT) 1(1)(2), MUMBAI V. ASIA PACIFIC SYSTEMS LTD,

ITA 4778/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0431 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 21-08-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES C, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P K BANSAL, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.4778/MUM/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 THE DCIT (IT) 1(1)(2) MUMBAI VS. ASIA PACIFIC SYSTEMS LTD REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS PAN AALCA8378F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.5696/MUM/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ASIA PACIFIC SYSTEMS LTD REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS VS. THE DCIT (IT) 1(1)(2) MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE REVENUE : SHRI RAJAT MITTAL FOR THE ASSESSEE : SHRI SUNIL MAHATA DATE OF HEARING : 10. 08 .2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 .0 8 .2017 O R D E R PER P K BANSAL, VICE-PRESIDENT: THESE CROSS APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE CIT(A)-55, MUMBAI, DATED 15.06.1015, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005- 06. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS FOR TH E APPEAL FILED BY HIM AND REQUESTED FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL. THE LEARNE D DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE SAME. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE AS WITHDRAWN. ITA NO.4778 & 5696/MUM/2015 ASIA PACIFIC SYSTEMS LTD. 2 3. NOW COMING TO THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, W HEREIN IT HAS RAISED AS MANY AS EIGHT GROUNDS OF APPEAL. GROUND NOS. 7 & 8 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND, THEREFORE, DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY ADJUDICATION. 4. GROUND NOS. 1 TO 4 RELATE TO MAKING OF THE ASSES SMENT ON A COMPANY, WHICH IS NOT IN EXISTENCE. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSMENT IN THIS CASE HAS BEEN FRAMED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144 VIDE ORDER DATED 20.05.2013, ON AN INCOME OF ` 40,64,230/-. THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN INITIATING REASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS AND CONSEQUENTLY COMPLETION OF THE PROCEEDINGS ON THE ASSESSEE COMPA NY, WHICH HAS BEEN LIQUIDATED AND DOES NOT EXIST IN THE EYES OF LAW. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSMENT SO MADE WAS BAD IN LAW AS THE COMPANY HA D LIQUIDATED ON 11.03.2009, WHILE THE NOTICE U/S. 148, ON THE BASIS OF WHICH ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FRAMED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS ISSUED ON 29.03.2012, AT THE ADDRESS OF LOOP MOBILE HOLDINGS INDIA LTD. THE CIT (A) RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE O F SARASWATI INDUSTRIAL SYNDICATE LTD. VS. CIT 186 ITR 278, QUASHED THE ASS ESSMENT AND ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y CONSIDERED THE SAME ALONG WITH THE ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE NOTED, IT IS A FACT THAT ITA NO.4778 & 5696/MUM/2015 ASIA PACIFIC SYSTEMS LTD. 3 ASSESSMENT IN THIS CASE WAS MADE ON THE ASSESSEE BY ISSUE OF NOTICE DATED 29.03.2012. BUT, MUCH BEFORE THE DATE ON INITIATIO N OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD LIQUIDATED ON 11.03.2009. WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) I N HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED AS NULL AND VOID IN THE NAME OF T HE COMPANY WHICH HAD ALREADY LIQUIDATED. OUR AFORESAID VIEW IS DULY SUP PORTED BY THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: CIT VS. VIVED MARKETING SERVICES PVT. LTD. (ITA NO. 273/2009) (DELHI HC) IMPSAT (P) LTD VS. ITO (2005) (92 TTJ 552) (DELHI ITAT) PAMPASAR DISTILLERY LTD VS. ACIT (2007) (15 SOT 331 ) (KOL ITAT) SILICON GRAPHICS SYSTEM (I) LTD., V. DEPARTMENT OF INCOME TAX (ITA. NO. 571 TO 576/DEL/2012 SPICE ENTERTAINMENT LTD (ITA NO. 475 OF 2011) (DELH I HC) CIT VS. KURBAN HUSSAIN IBRAHIMJI MITHIBORWALA, (197 1) 82 ITR 821 (SC) SPN MILK PRODUCT INDUSTRIES (P) LTD (ITA NO. 565/DE L/2O12) (DELHI ITAT) NO CONTRARY DECISION WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE B Y THE LEARNED DR, EVEN THOUGH HE HAS VEHEMENTLY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE, THEREFORE, CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND QUAS H THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ITA NO.4778 & 5696/MUM/2015 ASIA PACIFIC SYSTEMS LTD. 4 6. SINCE THE ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER HAS EVENTUALLY BEEN QUASHED BY US, THE OTHER GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY ADJUDICATION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017. SD/- SD/- (PAWAN SINGH) (P K BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT MUMBAI; DATED:11 TH AUGUST, 2017 SA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APP ELL ANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. T HE CIT(A), MUMBAI 4. THE CIT 5. DR, C BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER, #TRUE COPY # ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI