HomeDirect TaxBombay High Court Quashes Income Tax Assessments Orders Against Merged Reliance Units

Bombay High Court Quashes Income Tax Assessments Orders Against Merged Reliance Units

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Bombay High Court has quashed the income tax assessments orders against merged Reliance Units.

The bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain has observed that assessment orders have been passed in the name of the amalgamating companies by accepting the submission of the appellant-assessee that the orders could not have been made against the non-existing companies post amalgamation/merger, but result of this submission is that assessment order ought to have been and shall and should be passed in the name of amalgamated company Reliance Industries Limited (RIL).

The six appeals for the assessment years 1993-94 to 1995-96 are filed by the appellant-assessee M/s. RelianceIndustries Ltd. (RIL) and the department has filed two appeals for the assessment years 1994-95 being cross-appeals.

The issue raised was whether the assessment order with regard to amalgamating company should be assessed in the name of amalgamating company or amalgamated company post the amalgamation order.

The court held that although having knowledge of the entities having merged with RIL, the assessment orders were made on18 March 1996 in the name of the amalgamating companies RPEL and RPPL. For the reasons stated above while dealing with appeals for assessment years 1994-95, these assessment orders are required to be quashed and set aside as they are bad in law. Consequently, the appeal orders would also not survive. The question of law framed on 20 January 2025 is therefore answered in favour of the appellant-assessee and against the respondent-revenue.

Case Details

Case Title: Reliance Industries Limited Versus  P. L.Roongta

Case No.: Writ Petition No.772 Of 1999

Date: 14 February 2025

Counsel For Appellant: J. D. Mistri, Senior Counsel

Counsel For Respondent: Suresh Kumar

Read More: Income Tax Bill 2025: 20% STCG, 12.5% LTCG For STT Paid Equity Share Sale 

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Refund of Loan Can’t Be Treated as Unexplained Cash Credit; Additions Based Solely on Statements Without Evidence Not Sustainable: ITAT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has dismissed the Revenue’s...

ITAT Upholds Allowability of Advertisement Reimbursement and JV-Linked Expenses; Allows Proportionate Retainership Fees

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) addressed multiple contentious issues...

Under-Construction Property Qualifies as ‘Construction’: ITAT Allows S. 54F Deduction

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that investment...

More like this

Refund of Loan Can’t Be Treated as Unexplained Cash Credit; Additions Based Solely on Statements Without Evidence Not Sustainable: ITAT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has dismissed the Revenue’s...

ITAT Upholds Allowability of Advertisement Reimbursement and JV-Linked Expenses; Allows Proportionate Retainership Fees

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) addressed multiple contentious issues...