TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Invalid reassessment due to lack of notice and non-existent company post-amalgamation. Assessment annulled, appeal dismissed.</h1> <h3>Income-tax Officer Versus Milestone Overseas P. Ltd.</h3> Income-tax Officer Versus Milestone Overseas P. Ltd. - [2011] 12 ITR 781 Issues involved: Appeal and cross objection regarding reassessment under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and validity of reassessment framed in the name of a company that had amalgamated and ceased to exist.Reassessment under section 148:The assessee raised objections to the reassessment under section 148, stating that the notice was not served on an authorized person and therefore the entire reassessment proceedings were without jurisdiction. The authorized representative cited various legal precedents to support the argument that notice under section 148 is a condition precedent for reassessment. The argument was based on the fact that the notice was served on a person not authorized to receive it, rendering it invalid.Validity of reassessment post-amalgamation:The assessee contended that after amalgamation, the amalgamated company ceased to exist in the eyes of the law, and therefore no assessment or reassessment could be carried out on a non-existent entity. Legal references were provided to support this argument, emphasizing that the charge of tax is on the income of a person, and in the absence of the person's existence, no tax liability can be imposed. The authorized representative relied on legal decisions to assert that once a company is amalgamated, it ceases to be a person in the eyes of the law, making any assessment or reassessment post-amalgamation invalid.Decision:The Tribunal found merit in the arguments presented by the assessee and held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid due to the lack of valid service of notice under section 148 and the non-existence of the amalgamated company post-amalgamation. Citing legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the assessment made on the amalgamated company was on a non-existent assessee, rendering it null and void. Consequently, the Tribunal annulled the assessment order and dismissed the Revenue's appeal while allowing the assessee's cross-objection. The appeal filed by the Revenue was deemed infructuous and dismissed accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
