ICICI BANK LTD Vs. K J RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ). Rule, returnable forthwith. By the consent of the parties, both the petitions are taken up for final hearing.

(2.) IN these two petitions, the ICICI Bank Ltd. has challenged the notices both dated 17. 10. 2002 (relating to the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98) issued under s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Income Tax authorities at Ahmedabad to Anagram Finance Ltd. The said Anagram Finance ltd. was a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and was assessed to tax under the jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Ahmedabad. With effect from 1. 4. 1998, the said Anagram Finance Ltd. merged with ICICI Ltd. It is not in dispute that by a letter dated 27. 11. 2001. ICICI Ltd. had informed the Income Tax authorities at Ahmedabad about the merger of Anagram Finance Ltd. with ICICI Ltd. and had requested to transfer all pending cases of the erstwhile Anagram Finance Ltd. to the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3 (1), Mumbai under whose jurisdiction ICICI ltd. was assessed. Thereafter, the ICICI Ltd. merged with ICICI Bank Ltd. with effect from 30th March, 2002, Thus, the fact that Anagram Finance Ltd. had ceased to exist with effect from 1. 4. 1998 was made known to the Income Tax authorities at Ahmedabad by ICICI Ltd. vide letter dated 27. 11. 2001.

(3.) IN spite of the knowledge about the non-existence of Anagram Finance ltd. , the impugned notices, both dated 17. 10. 2002 have been issued under s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the I. T. Act' for short) to Anagram Finance ltd. for the purpose of reopening the assessments for the assessment year 1996-97 and 1997-98. The validity of these notices are challenged in the present petitions by ICICI Bank Ltd. mainly on two grounds. Firstly, it is contended that the notices issued to a non existent Company namely. Anagram Finance ltd. is in contravention of the conditions precedent required to be fulfilled before initiating proceedings under s. 148 of the I. T. Act and secondly, it is contended that even on merits, there is no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all materials facts and, therefore, the notices issued to the assessee beyond the period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year are liable to be quashed and set aside.