08

29.01.2025 Bimal Sarawgi (Former Director Sikha Movies Private Limited)

Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward 12(1), Kolkata & Ors.

Mr. Avra Maumder Ms. Alisha Das Mr. Suman Bhowmik Mr. Samrat Das Ms. Elina Dey Mr. Sourendra Nath Banerjee Mr. Alishan Hossain … … for the petitioner Mrs. Smita Das De … … for the respondents

1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the notice dated August 30, 2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 along with the impugned approval issued under section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2015-

16 by the respondent no.1 and respondent no.2.

2. The petitioner, a lawful citizen of India, identified by PAN No. AJQPS5463A, is a regular assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The petitioner was previously the director of Sikha Movies Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the erstwhile company”). The said company underwent voluntary liquidation, culminating in its dissolution by an order dated November 9, 2021, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), pursuant to Section 59(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The liquidation process was undertaken following the passage of a special resolution by the members of the company on February 22, 2019 and subsequent compliance with all statutory formalities, including the filing of requisite intimation with the jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 178(1) of the Act on February 27, 2019.

3. The NCLT order, after a meticulous examination of the liquidator’s report, confirmed that all outstanding liabilities had been duly discharged and that the dissolution was carried out bona fide, free from any intent to defraud creditors. As a result, Sikha Movies Private Limited ceased to exist as a legal entity upon the issuance of the said order.

4. Subsequently, on June 21, 2022, a search and seizure operation was conducted under Section 132 of the Act targeting various entities allegedly connected with Aludecor Group & Others. During the operation, incriminating material and electronic evidence were seized from the premises of a Chartered Accountant, one Banwari Lal Agarwal. The said material purportedly implicated the erstwhile company as a beneficiary of accommodation entries facilitated by a web of shell entities, allegedly including M/s Krishnasudha Dealtrade Pvt. Ltd. It was alleged that the erstwhile company had received a bogus unsecured loan amounting to ₹65,00,000 during the Financial Year 2014-15, relevant to Assessment Year 2015-16 and had paid interest amounting to ₹2,04,493 on the same. The modus operandi involved the purported routing of unaccounted funds through fictitious entities in exchange for commission payments.

5. Based on the above findings, the respondent authority issued a notice under Section 148 of the Act on August 30, 2024, seeking to reopen the assessment for Assessment Year 2015-16 on the ground that income to the tune of ₹67,04,493 had allegedly escaped assessment.

6. Submissions for the Learned Counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner seeks to quash the impugned notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, contending that it suffers from jurisdictional infirmity, procedural impropriety and contravention of established legal principles.

7. The petitioner asserts that the notice is fundamentally invalid as it has been issued in the name of a non-existent entity, namely Sikha Movies Private Limited, which was dissolved pursuant to the NCLT order dated November 9, 2021. Relying on the legal principle established in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited reported in (2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC), the petitioner contends that proceedings initiated against a dissolved company are non-est in law. The petitioner submits that such jurisdictional defect cannot be rectified or cured by invoking the provisions of Section 292B of the Act, as the