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>Invalidity of Tax Notice for Non-Existing Entity Post-Amalgamation: Legal Precedent Quashes Assessment</h1> <h3>North Bengal Promoters Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 7 (1), olkata & Ors.</h3> North Bengal Promoters Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 7 (1), olkata & Ors. - TMI Issues involved:The issues involved in this case include the challenge to an impugned notice dated April 20, 2021, relating to assessment year 2013-14 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the grounds that the notice was issued in the name of a company that had already been amalgamated, rendering it a non-existing entity.Details of the Judgment:Challenge to Impugned Notice:The petitioner challenged the impugned notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14, contending that it was issued in the name of a company that had already been amalgamated on 11.08.21. The petitioner argued that the department had been informed about this amalgamation, making the notice invalid in the eyes of the law.Legal Precedent:The petitioner relied on a decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Takshashila Realties Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, where it was held that notices issued against a non-existent company post-amalgamation are not sustainable. The Court emphasized that once a scheme of amalgamation has been sanctioned, the amalgamating company ceases to exist, and any notices issued against it are invalid.Court's Decision:After considering the submissions of both parties, the Court held that the impugned notice dated April 20, 2021, was not tenable in the eyes of the law. The Court ruled that all further steps pursuant to the impugned notice were also invalid. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and the impugned notice was quashed on the grounds that it was issued in the name of a non-existing company, despite the revenue being aware of its non-existence.Disposition of the Case:Since no affidavits were called for, the Court deemed the allegations made in the writ petition to have been denied by the respondents. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of.This judgment highlights the importance of legal compliance in issuing notices post-amalgamation and underscores the consequences of issuing notices against non-existent entities in the realm of taxation law.
TaxTMI 