Transferor company's liabilities post-amalgamation shift to appellant. Emphasizes tax compliance. Remanded for fresh assessment.

The court held that the transferor company lost its identity post amalgamation, and the liabilities had to be borne by the appellant. The court emphasized the importance of following proper procedures to contest assessments and pay lawful taxes. The matter was remanded to the lower authorities for fresh consideration, with the writ appeal allowed and previous orders set aside. The appellant was directed to file a substitution petition within 10 days and provide necessary documents for assessment. Failure to comply would lead to dismissal of the appeal. No costs were awarded, and urgent copies of the order were to be provided to the parties.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against assessment order - Challenge to concurrent findings of lower authorities - Proper assessment in case of company amalgamation.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against an assessment order dated 20th December, 2011, challenged by the appellant, which was upheld by the appellate and revisional authorities. The court noted that the appellant, a transferee company, had amalgamated with the transferor company in 2009. The appellant contended that the assessment should not have been in the name of the transferor company post the amalgamation. However, the authorities found the assessment valid due to lack of reconciliation statements and accounts. The court observed that the appellant should have substituted itself in place of the transferor company to contest the assessment properly.

The court held that the transferor company lost its identity post the amalgamation, and the liabilities had to be borne by the appellant. It was noted that the appellant failed to follow the proper procedure to contest the assessment, leading to the current situation. The court emphasized that lawful taxes must be paid, and the State should be able to recover them. Considering these factors, the matter was remanded to the lower authorities for fresh consideration.

The writ appeal was allowed, and the orders of the revisional and appellate authorities were set aside. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. The appellant was directed to file a petition for substitution within 10 days. Once substituted, the appellant had to produce all necessary documents for assessment. Failure to comply would result in dismissal of the appeal without further reference to the court. The court clarified that the order applied to the assessment period of the 4th quarter ending 2009 as mentioned in the revisional authority's order. No costs were awarded, and urgent copies of the order were to be provided to the parties upon compliance with legal formalities.

---