आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद(cid:671)ी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िद(cid:671)ी

(cid:373)ी िवकास अव(cid:830)थी, (cid:586)ाियक सद(cid:735)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं.1360/िद(cid:671)ी/2025 (िन.व. 2012-13)

ITA No.1360/DEL/2025 (A.Y.2012-13)

Dazzle Developers P. Ltd., PHD House, 4/2 Siri Institutional Area, August Kranti Marg, Hauz Khas, Delhi 110016 ...... अपीलाथ(cid:7278)/Appellant PAN: AACCD-1643-J बनाम Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), New Delhi ..... (cid:7079)ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ(cid:334) (cid:554)ारा/Appellant by : S/Shri Sanchit Jain, Chartered Accountant &

Uttam Yadav (cid:366)ितवादी(cid:554)ारा Respondent by : Shri Manoj Kumar, SR.DR /

सुनवाई क(cid:7409) ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 22/05/2025 घोषणा क(cid:7409) ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 19/08/2025 आदशे /ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 19.04.2024, for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. Shri Sanchit Jain, appearing on behalf of the assessee at the outset submitted that the assessment order has been passed in the name of a non existing company. Therefore, the assessment order lacks valid jurisdiction.

2.1. Narrating facts of the case, he submitted that notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was issued by the AO on

31.03.2019 for AY 2012-13. In response to the said notice, the assessee vide application dated 08.04.2019 informed the Assessing Officer (AO) that the name of the assessee has already been struck off from the Register of Companies and is dissolved w.e.f. 31.01.2018. Thus, the company is no more in existence. The assessee also placed on record copy of the order from Registrar of Companies dated 31.01.2018 notifying that pursuant to section 560(5) of the Companies Act, 1956, the name of assessee has been struck off from the register and the company is dissolved. Despite, the fact that the AO was informed about dissolution of assessee, the AO proceeded with the assessment and completed assessment u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 08.12.2019 making addition of Rs.30,00,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, the assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A)

dismissed appeal of the assessee. Hence, the present appeal.

The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that once the name of the assessee has been struck off in the register of companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies, the company ceases to exist, hence, no assessment can be made in the name of a non existing entity. Assessment made in the name of a non existing entity is invalid and void ab inito. In support of his submissions, he placed reliance on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Vived Marketing Services P. Ltd. in Income Tax Appeal No. 273 of 2009 decided on 17.09.2009 by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and in the decision of Pandian Anbalagan vs. ITO in Writ Petition 11841 of 2022 decided on 31.10.2023 by Hon’ble Madras High Court. The ld. AR submits that if at all the Assessing Officer wanted to initiate proceedings against the company under the provision of Income Tax Act, the appropriate action for the Department was to approach National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in accordance with the provisions of section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 r.w.r 11 and 87 of the NCLT Rules. The ld. AR submits that even today, the said company has not been revived. To substantiate his contention, he placed on record copy of status report dated 21.05.2025 from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, at page 58 and 59 of the paper book.

3. Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar representing the department placed reliance on the findings of CIT(A) in para 5, 5.1 and 5.2 of the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee.

4. Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The assessee in ground