Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether reassessment proceedings and the assessment order were valid when the notice under section 148 was issued in the name of a company that had ceased to exist upon amalgamation.
Analysis: The notice under section 148, as well as the consequential notice under section 142(1), was issued in the name of the amalgamating company after the approved scheme of amalgamation had taken effect. The assessee had informed the Assessing Officer that the amalgamating company no longer existed. Once amalgamation is effective, the amalgamating entity ceases to exist and jurisdiction cannot validly be invoked in its name. A notice issued to a non-existent entity is a fundamental jurisdictional defect, and participation in the proceedings does not cure that defect.
Conclusion: The reassessment initiated in the name of the non-existent amalgamating company was invalid, and the assessment order was quashed.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded because the reassessment proceedings were held to be without jurisdiction on account of the notice having been issued to an entity that had already ceased to exist after amalgamation.
Ratio Decidendi: A reassessment notice issued in the name of an entity that has ceased to exist on amalgamation is jurisdictionally invalid and cannot be cured by subsequent participation in the proceedings.