IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2020-21 Liquidhub Analytics Pvt. Ltd. NFAC, Delhi (now merged with Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd.)

Vs.

Plot No.14, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi Phase III, MIDC SEZ, Village Man, Pune – 411057 PAN: AAFCA5135Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Pathak Department by : Smt Nilu Jaggi, CIT Date of hearing : 11-02-2025 Date of pronouncement : 25-03-2025

O R D E R

PER R. K. PANDA, VP :

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated

26.07.2024 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to assessment year 2020-21.

2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee, Liquidhub Analytics Pvt. Ltd. is a company and has an undertaking located in Special Economic Zone (SEZ) at Gurugram where it is engaged in the business of software development and other related information technology support services to its customers. It filed its return of income on 12.02.2021 declaring total income of Rs.25,34,90,210/-. Since the assessee had entered into certain international transactions, the Assessing Officer referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) who proposed an upward adjustment of Rs.3,07,80,000/-. The Assessing Officer, in the draft assessment order, apart from making the above addition, also made addition of Rs.24,70,183/- on account of health and education cess. Since the income returned at Rs.25,34,90,210/- was processed u/s 143(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), the Assessing Officer, after adding the TP adjustment of Rs.3,07,80,000/- and the disallowance of health and education cess at Rs.24,70,183/- determined the total income at Rs.29,53,41,873/-.

3. Before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), the assessee apart from challenging the addition on account of TP adjustment as well as disallowance of health and education cess, challenged the validity of assessment being made on a non-existing entity. The relevant ground before the DRP reads as under:

“1.3 The Assesses company has ceased to exist pursuant to the merger with Capgemini Technology Services India Limited w.e.f. 1st April, 2020, duly approved by National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') order dated 24 June 2021. Accordingly, the draft assessment order u/s 144C(1) issued by Assessment unit, Income Tax Department is invalid and thereby we request your goodself that impugned draft assessment order is bad in law and needs to be quashed.”

4. The DRP vide para 4.2 of the order decided the issue by observing as under:

“4.2 Ground Numbers 1.2 to 1.4 are technical grounds in which the assessee has challenged the validity of the Draft Assessment Order passed by the AO. At the outset, the Draft Order has been challenged on jurisdictional counts stating that the AO has not provided the copy of the CBDT approval transfer in the case from NPAC to AO. It is further stated that the assessee company has ceased to exist pursuant to merger with Capgemini Technology Services India Limited w.e.f. 1 April, 2020. These jurisdictional issues have not been discussed in the Draft Assessment Order dated 21.09.2023. It is not clear whether these objections were taken by the assessee in the course of assessment proceedings. The Panel notes that Show Cause Notices were issued to the assessee in the course of assessment proceedings as well as the TP proceedings to which the assessee has duly complied and the DAO has been finalised after taking consideration of the submissions of the assessee. In the circumstances, the assessee having participated in the assessment proceedings cannot now take the plea that the AO has acted without jurisdiction or that it did not have jurisdiction to pass the DAO in the case of the assessee. It is also pertinent to mention that