- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46950 WP No. 18384 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 18384 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR PRADEEP KUMAR SHEKAR S/O LATE MR. SHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O C501, SALARPURIA SERENITI, 5TH MAIN, HSR LAYOUT, SECTOR - 7, BENGALURU - 560 102. (FORMER DIRECTOR, M/S PLG POWER AND INFRA PVT. LTD., REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES W.E.F., 08.11.2019) 2. MR. SHANKAR SURESH, S/O SRI SHANKAR SHASTRI, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O NO. 33, 22ND MAIN, PADMANABHA NAGAR, BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 070. (FORMER DIRECTOR, M/S PLG POWER AND INFRA PVT. LTD., REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES W.E.F., 08.11.2019) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BHARATH KUMAR V., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46950 WP No. 18384 of 2025 AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE. 3RD FLOOR JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI - 110 001 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BENGALURU HAVING OFFICE AT BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560 095 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(1)(1), BENGALURU HAVING OFFICE AT BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA BENGLAURU - 560 095 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NAGENDRA A., CGC/ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI. M. THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER DATED 31.05.2023 IN NO. ITBA/AST/S147/2023- 24/1053371710(1) PASSED BY THE R2 UNDER SECTION 147 R/W SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME TAX WHEREIN THE R2 HAS ASSESSED THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE DISSOLVED COMPANY i.e., M/S PLG POWER AND INFRA PVT., LTD., TO THE TUNE OF RS. 4,19,36,996/- (ANNEXURE -A) AND ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46950 WP No. 18384 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs; "a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing the assessment order dated 31.05.2023 in DIN & Order No.ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1053371710(1)passed by the Respondent No.2 under Section 147 R/w Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Annexure A); b. Grant such other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts of the present matter." 2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on 08.11.2019, the petitioners were the former Directors of M/s.PLG Power Infra Private Limited Company, which was struck off from the list maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai, vide Order dated 08.11.2019. The petitioners informed the respondents about the said - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46950 WP No. 18384 of 2025 company being struck off by the Registrar of Companies as can be seen from the representation at Annexure-J1 dated 31.05.2023 which was uploaded by the respondents themselves at Annexure - J dated 23.05.2023. Meanwhile, the respondents issued a notice dated 30.06.2021 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act which culminated in the impugned assessment order as against the non existed company, aggrieved by which, the petitioners are before this Court by way of the present petition. 3. Under identical circumstances in relation to a company which was struck off by the ROC, this Court in the case of Coffee Day Resorts (MSM) Pvt.Ltd., Bengaluru Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax and another passed in WP No.9594/2023 has held as under; "9. In light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. reported in (2019) 107 taxmann.com 375 (SC), it is clear that notice and assessment order passed in the name of non-existing company is a substantive - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46950 WP No. 18384 of 2025 illegality and is an order passed without jurisdiction. Accordingly, only on the above ground of M/s.Shankar Resources (P) Ltd., having merged with the petitioner company and was not an existing entity as on the date of issuance of notice, the notice under Section 148A (b) dated 28.01.2023 vide Annexure-D, similar identical notice dated 23.02.2023 at Annexure-F and notice dated 13.03.2023 at Annexure-H are set aside. So also, order under Section 148A (d) dated 28.03.2023 vide Annexure-K and notice under Section 148 dated 28.03.2023 vide Annexure-L are set aside." 4. A similar view has been taken by the Madras High Court in the case of Pandian Anbalagan Vs. Income Tax Officer passed in WP No.11841/2022 and W.M.P No.11278/2022 which reads as under; "8. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the right course available for the respondent/Department is only to approach the NCLT in terms of provisions of Section 252 of the Companies Act read with Rules 11 and 87 of the NCLT Rules for the revival of the Company. After revival of the Company, it is open for the respondent/Department to initiate proceedings - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46950 WP No. 18384 of 2025 under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 9. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30.03.2022 bearing ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1042158368(1) passed by the respondent for PAN:AASCS0886M for AY 2015-16 is quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed." 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the undisputed fact that the aforesaid company named M/s PLG Power and Infra Pvt.Ltd., was struck off by the ROC on 08.11.2019 and the principles enunciated in the aforesaid judgment, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned assessment order deserves to be set aside by issuing certain directions. 6. In the result, I pass the following; ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46950 WP No. 18384 of 2025 (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-A dated 31.05.2023, passed by respondent No.2 is hereby quashed. (iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondent No.2 to proceed further under Sections 248 to 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 and thereafter proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE GH List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5 CT-SG