Wp(C)/19086/2016 Of Krishnakumar v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/18TH JYAISHTA, 1938 WP(C).No. 19086 of 2016 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : ---------------------- KRISHNA KUMAR, KANIYAMKUDIYIL HOUSE, PBR-100, PMC, 10/320, IRINGOLE P.O., PATTAL, PERUMBAVOOR-683 542. BY ADVS.SRI.P.RAVINDRA NATH SRI.N.KRISHNA PRASAD RESPONDENT : ------------------------- INCOME TAX OFFICER, I.S.PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682 015. CORP. WARD 2(5), KOCHI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C).No. 19086 of 2016 (I) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ---------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 7.12.2007 WAS ISSUED UNDER SECTION 560(5) OF THE COMPANIES ACT.UNDER SECTION 560(5) OF THE COMPANIES ACT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.8.2015 IN CO APPEAL NO.19/2014.NO.19/2014. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 3.9.2015 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 8.1.2016 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 27.1.2016 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 21.3.2016 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.3.2016 OF THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: -------------------------------------------- NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.=============W.P. (C) No. 19086 of 2016=================== Dated this, the 8[th] day of June, 2016 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P7 order ofassessment passed by the respondent against M/s.UNIFAB LatestTechnologies Pvt. Ltd in respect of assessment year 2008-09. Themain contention urged by the petitioner is that the company itselfhad been struck off from the register maintained by the Registrarof Companies as early as on 2007. The said action of theRegistrar of Companies came to be challenged by rival group andthough the name of the Company was restored to the register, inan appeal filed by the petitioner as Company Appeal No.19/2014,this court by judgment dated 12/8/2015 restored the action of theRegistrar of Companies in striking off the name of the Companyfrom the register. Therefore, the contention is that there could notbe any assessment against the Company as such. 2.Standing counsel appearing on behalf of therespondent submits that even in case of association of persons -:2:- being dissolved in terms of Section 177(1) of the Income Tax Act, itshall be open for the assessing officer to effect the assessmentagainst the association of persons itself. Section 177(1) reads asunder; 2.Standing counsel appearing on behalf of therespondent submits that even in case of association of persons -:2:- being dissolved in terms of Section 177(1) of the Income Tax Act, itshall be open for the assessing officer to effect the assessmentagainst the association of persons itself. Section 177(1) reads asunder; “Where any business or profession carried on by anassociation of persons has been discontinued or wherean association of persons is dissolved, the AssessingOfficer shall make an assessment of the total income ofthe association of persons as if no such discontinuanceor dissolution had taken place and all the provisions ofthis Act, including the provisions relating to the levy ofa penalty or any other sum chargeable under anyprovision of this Act shall apply, so far as may be, tosuch assessment.”association of persons has been discontinued or wherean association of persons is dissolved, the AssessingOfficer shall make an assessment of the total income ofthe association of persons as if no such discontinuanceor dissolution had taken place and all the provisions ofthis Act, including the provisions relating to the levy ofa penalty or any other sum chargeable under anyprovision of this Act shall apply, so far as may be, tosuch assessment.” This provision applies even in instances where name of Company isstruck off from the register of companies. However, with referenceto the liability, other provisions are available under the Income TaxAct to enable the respondent to recover the amount as assessed inExt.P7 order. 3.In the said circumstances, I do not find any illegality inthe respondent passing Ext.P7 order. It shall be open for the W.P(C) No.19086/16 -:3:- petitioner to challenge Ext.P7, if so advised, in an appeal as per the statutory formalities. Writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. Rp8/06/2016 Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE //True Copy// P.S to Judge