Case Of Takshashila Realties Pvt. Ltd v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income

OD-47 W.P.O. No.970 of 2021IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTAConstitutional Writ JurisdictionORIGINAL SIDEAKSA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD AND ANR.VersusTHE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA AND ANOTHER BEFORE: Date : 5[th] October, 2021. The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN APPEARANCE:Mr.Pranit Bag, Adv.Mr.Subhash Agarwal, Adv.Mr.Anuj Kr. Mishra, Adv.Mr.Brijesh Singh, Adv.…for petitionersMr.Y.J.Dastoor, ASGMr.Prabir Bhowmik, Adv.Mr. Madhu Jana, Adv.For respondents The Court: Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties. In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned noticedated 17[th] June, 2021 relating to assessment year 2014-15 under Section 148 ofthe income Tax Act, 1961 which is a transferee company on the ground that theimpugned notice has been issued in the name of the company which has alreadybeen amalgamated on 15[th] March, 2019 with retrospective effect from 1st April,2017 and the department has been intimated about this amalgamation which ismatters of record and such notice in the name of a non-existing company is nottenable in the eye of law since information of such amalgamation was alreadygiven to the respondent on 8[th] April, 2019. In support of his contention Mr. Bag, learned advocate appearing forthe petitioners has relied on a decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Takshashila Realties Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 2016 SCC OnLine Guj 6462 and specifically relies on Paragraph 10 of the said judgment and also my own order dated 2[nd] August, 2021 in WPA 1791 of 2020 (Brubeck Resources Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Union of India &Ors.). Considering the submission of the parties, I am of the view that theimpugned notice dated 17[th] June, 2021 (Annexure P-4 to the writ petition) is nottenable in the eye of law and all further steps pursuant to the said impugnednotice also are not tenable in the eye of law and the same are quashed. This writpetition is allowed and the impugned notice is quashed solely on the ground thatthe impugned notice was issued in the name of non-existing company in spite ofrevenue having notice and knowledge of non-existence of such Company.Quashing of this notice will not prevent the respondents from issuing fresh noticein accordance with law. Since no affidavits have been called for, allegations made in the writpetition are deemed to have been denied by the respondents. Accordingly, WPO No.970 of 2021 is disposed of. (MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.) sb/