Use of Modified Trademark 'MAHINDRA ZEO' Does Not Infringe Plaintiff’s 'EZIO': Delhi High Court High Court Quashes Proceedings for Two Accused in Unauthorized Construction Case, Criticizes Arbitrary Implication Commissioner Duty Bound to Decide Appeal on Merits: High Court Clarifies Application of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme Dismissal of Petitions Seeking Quashing of Proceedings in Fraudulent Land Transactions Involving Government-Vested Land: Calcutta High Court Quashing FIR in Dowry Harassment Case Not Justified Without Thorough Investigation," Rules Kerala High Court Deletion of Name from Revenue Records Without Notice Violates Principles of Natural Justice: Andhra Pradesh High Court Delay in Seeking Compassionate Appointment Defeats Purpose of Scheme: Orissa High Court Overturns Single Judge Order Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Temporary Injunction in LLP Fraud Case: No Prima Facie Evidence of Fraud Established Kerala High Court Upholds Departmental Proceedings Against Police Officer on Deputation for Immigration Duty Judicial Review Under Article 226 Is Not an Appeal Over Disciplinary Findings: Punjab and Haryana High Court Lack of Medical and Scientific Evidence Prevents Conviction in Sodomy Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused Under POCSO Act Overwriting and Minor Discrepancies Do Not Vitiate Valid Execution of Will: Calcutta High Court Full Back Wages Awarded to Dismissed Co-operative Bank Employee for Suspension Period: Kerala High Court Character Assassination by Husband Justifies Wife's Refusal to Co-Habit: Orissa High Court Upholds Maintenance Award to Wife Defendants Forfeited Tenancy by Denouncing Plaintiffs' Title: Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules in Land Dispute Procedural Rules Must Facilitate Justice, Not Obstruct It, Says Court While Allowing Applications for Additional Documents in a Commercial Suit: Andhra Pradesh High Court Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses Appeals Over Disputed Sale Deeds, Affirms Need for Concrete Evidence of Minor Status

A notice to a non-existent entity is a substantive illegality, not a procedural lapse: Delhi High Court Quashes Income Tax Notices

30 September 2024 1:06 PM

By: sayum


Delhi High Court in Religare Enterprises Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax quashed reassessment notices and orders issued in the name of a dissolved amalgamating company. The court held that any assessment or notice issued to a non-existent entity after amalgamation is void ab initio, following the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd..

Religare Securities Limited (RSL) merged with Religare Enterprises Limited (REL) through a scheme of amalgamation sanctioned by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) with an effective date of April 1, 2016. RSL had duly informed the tax authorities of this amalgamation in December 2017. Despite this, in April 2021, the Income Tax Department issued a reassessment notice to RSL, a company that no longer existed. After a previous quashing of the reassessment notice, the department continued the proceedings and issued subsequent orders in the name of the amalgamated entity, REL.

REL challenged the proceedings, contending that notices and orders issued in the name of a non-existent entity are invalid under the law.

The court primarily focused on whether the reassessment notices issued to a dissolved company (RSL) are valid under the Income Tax Act. The petitioners argued that any notice issued to a non-existent company following its dissolution under a merger or amalgamation scheme is void. They relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., which held that tax proceedings initiated in the name of a dissolved company cannot be cured under Section 292B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The Income Tax Department contended that the defect of issuing a notice to the dissolved company was procedural and curable under Section 292B. They also argued that the amalgamated entity (REL) participated in the proceedings, and thus, the defect should not invalidate the reassessment.

The court ruled that issuing notices to a company that has ceased to exist after an amalgamation constitutes a jurisdictional error, not merely a procedural one. The bench noted:

"The issuance of notices in the name of a non-existent entity is a substantive illegality and cannot be rectified under Section 292B."

The court further explained that participation by the amalgamated entity (REL) in the tax proceedings does not cure the jurisdictional defect. The judges emphasized that tax authorities must ensure that notices are properly addressed to the correct legal entity, especially after being informed of a merger.

Relying heavily on the Supreme Court's decision in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., the court reaffirmed that any assessment or notice addressed to a dissolved entity is legally unsustainable.

The Delhi High Court quashed the reassessment notices and orders issued in the name of RSL, holding them to be void and without jurisdiction. The ruling reinforces the principle that tax authorities cannot issue notices or conduct assessments against dissolved companies, as it is a violation of procedural and substantive legal standards.

Date of Decision: September 26, 2024

Religare Enterprises Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax​.

Similar News