Form No.J(2)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

Present :

The Hon’ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

WPA 3635 of 2025

Sargam Lefins Private Limited

versus

Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(3) Kolkata & Ors.

For the petitioner : Mr. Avra Mazumder

Ms. Alisha Das

Mr. Suman Bhowmik

Mr. Samrat Das

Ms. Elina Dey

For the respondents : Mr. Tilak Mitra

Heard on : 03.09.2025. Judgment on : 03.09.2025

Raja Basu Chowdhury, J (Oral):

1. Challenging the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax

Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) dated 4^th April, 2024 in respect of the assessment year 2017-2018 against one Aristocrat Distributors Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the “noticee company”) which has since amalgamated with the

petitioner, the instant writ petition has been filed.

2. Mr. Mazumder, learned advocate representing the petitioner at the

very outset would submit that by a scheme of amalgamation which has since been sanctioned by the National Company Law Tribunal,

Kolkata Bench (hereinafter referred to as the “Tribunal”) in CP No. 1505/KV/2019 vide order dated 11^th March, 2024, 5 several companies stood amalgamated with the petitioner. According to Mr. Mazumder, the noticee company has been referred to in the above order as the transferor company No. 1 and the petitioner is a transferee company. In terms of the above order passed by the Tribunal, the appointed date has been fixed as 1^st April, 2023. Having regard thereto, he submits that the aforesaid notice under Section 148 of the said Act, dated 4^th April, 2024 for the assessment year 2017-18, is a nonstarter and should be set aside.

3. Mr. Mitra, learned advocate representing the Income Tax Department, would submit that in the instant case though a notice in form CAA-3 was served on the petitioner intimating initiation of amalgamation proceedings on 24^th June, 2019 nothing further was informed to the petitioner. According to him, a notice under Section 148A(b) of the said Act was issued to the said noticee company on 8th March, 2024. Although, the amalgamation order was passed on 11^th March, 2024, the noticee company did appear pursuant to the above notice and had sought for time by the communication in writing dated 23^rd March, 2024.

4. Subsequently, on 4^th April, 2024, the order under Section 148A(d)

was passed and the notice under Section 148 was issued. Although, the petitioner had filed a writ petition challenging the above notice and the order under Section 148 of the said Act, the said writ petition was withdrawn with liberty to proceed afresh as would corroborate from the order dated 19^th June, 2024. Subsequent by the writ petition has been filed on 13^th February, 2025. No case for interference has been made out. The writ petition deserves to be and should be dismissed.

5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, I, prima facie, find that the noticee company had duly notified the Income Tax authorities with regard to initiation of amalgamation proceedings on 24^th June, 2019. Still latter before the amalgamation proceedings was disposed of by order dated 11th March, 2024, on 8th March, 2024 a notice under Section 148A(b) of the said Act was issued in respect of the assessment year 2017- 2018. It is true that the effective date for the scheme has been determined as 1^st April, 2023, however, as on 8^th April, 2024, the department had no option but to issue the notice in respect of the noticee company as on such date the noticee company was very much in existence, as the order of amalgamation was yet to be passed. The factum from the notice under Section 148A(b) of the said Act was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal. It is apparent from the order dated 11^th March, 2024 that the petitioner or the said noticee company did not bring to the notice of the tribunal that a notice under Section 148A(b) had already been served on the noticee company. In any event, simply because the amalgamation order has bee