Assessment framed by AO u/s 143(3) against a non-existent entity despite being informed about merger of assessee company with its holding company is liable to be quashed
Assessment framed by AO u/s 143(3) against a non-existent entity despite being informed about merger of assessee company with its…
![[2019] 104 taxmann.com 59 (Bombay) IT : Once Commissioner (Appeals) had passed order after verification of merit of claim of expenditure and depreciation, Tribunal was not right in law in reversing said conclusion without examining its correctness Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Orders of (Non-speaking orders) - Assessment year 2006-07 - Assessing Officer passed an order of reassessment, in which, additions were made by disallowing assessee-company's claim of expenditure as well as claim of depreciation - On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed both claims after verifying merit of claims - Commissioner (Appeals) found that in another year in assessee's own case Tribunal allowed depreciation on ground that assets were ready to use though assessee could not commence commercial production due to lack of working capital - Commissioner (Appeals) also found that Assessing Officer had changed its opinion from earlier Assessing Officer and disallowed impugned amounts - Whether Tribunal was not right in law in merely reversing order of Commissioner (Appeals) without any discussion or even any conclusion justifying of additions made by Assessing Officer - Held, yes Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd.](https://thetaxtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Untitled-1048-min.png)
){kind=link}
&description=&image=https://thetaxtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Untitled-1042-min.png){kind=link}