RBSL TRADERS (OPC) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI V. DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI

ITA 3709/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves RBSL Traders (OPC) Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the assessment order for the year 2021-22, which included additions of INR 31,84,04,438 for alleged non-genuine and bogus purchases. The company had been struck off from the Register of Companies and was dissolved as per the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal found that the assessment order was improperly issued against a dissolved entity, leading to inherent statutory infirmities in the proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the company had not been revived by the AO or the assessee, and the dissolution was not communicated during the assessment, resulting in the setting aside of the assessment and appellate orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34214 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Companies Act, 2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUNIL YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: VIJAY KUMAR SINGLA
• Keywords: Set aside; Bogus
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

"ITA No.3709/Del/2024 Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “F” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3709/Del/2024 [Assessment Year : 2021-22] RBSL Traders (OPC) Pvt.Ltd. I-36A, Community Centre Lal Kuan, New Delhi-110058. PAN-AAJCR3598L vs DCIT Circle-19(1) Delhi APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Vijay Kumar Singla, Adv. Respondent by Shri Sunil Yadav, CIT DR Date of Hearing 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 10.03.2025 ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee seeking to assail the First Appellate order dated 29.12.2023 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“CIT(A)”] under s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising from the assessment order dated 21.12.2022 passed under s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act pertaining to assessment year 2021-22. 2. As per the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the additions of INR 31,84,04,438/- on account of alleged non-genuine and bogus purchases. 3. Heard both the sides at length. From the case records and in the light of the submissions made, it transpires that the name of the company was struck off from Register of Companies under s. 248(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 as per communication dated 21.12.2021. As per the aforesaid communication in Form No.STK-7 issued by the Register of Companies, the name of the assessee company struck off from the Register of Companies and the said companies stand dissolved. ITA No.3709/Del/2024 Page | 2 4. As per CBDT notification F.No.225/423/2017-ITA.II dated 29.12.2017, the companies which stood struck off requires to restore for continuation of the income tax proceedings. The company which was dissolved has not been however revived by the AO or the assessee. Thus the assessment order dated 21.12.2022 framed on a company already dissolved under the Companies Act, 2013 do not entitle the Revenue to frame an assessment on the dissolved company. 5. We simultaneously notice that the assessee while filing the details before the AO has not intimated the factum of dissolution of company. Certain information were provided to AO in the capacity of the Director who had become functus officio. Similarly, the appeal has been preferred against the assessment order before the CIT(A) as well as the ITAT by the Ex-directors. The assessment order as well the subsequent appellate proceedings thus suffers the vice of inherent statutory infirmities. 6. In totality of facts and circumstances, we deem it appropriate to set aside the first appellate order as well as the assessment order and restore the matter to the file of the AO for fresh assessment in accordance with law after ensuring compliance of the directions provided in the CBDT notification noted above. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court on 10.03.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SUDHIR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER *Amit Kumar, Sr.P.S* (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "