Assessment on a non-existent entity is a nullity; reassessment notices in the amalgamated company's name were invalid.

Reassessment notice, the jurisdictional notice under section 143(2), and the reassessment order issued in the name of an amalgamated company that had already ceased to exist were held to be invalid where the Assessing Officer had been informed of the amalgamation beforehand. The defect was treated as jurisdictional rather than procedural, so it could not be cured by section 292B. Applying the settled principle that an assessment on a non-existent entity is a nullity, the reassessment proceedings and order were quashed. The analysis distinguished cases where amalgamation had not been disclosed or the facts were materially different.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment proceedings and the reassessment order are valid when the notices under sections 148 and 143(2) and the order are issued in the name of an amalgamated company that had ceased to exist, despite prior intimation of amalgamation to the Assessing Officer.

Analysis: The assessee had informed the Assessing Officer that the original company had merged and had ceased to exist before the reopening notice was issued. Even so, the notice under section 148, the jurisdictional notice under section 143(2), and the reassessment order were all issued in the name of the non-existent entity. Such a defect was held to be jurisdictional, not merely procedural, and therefore incapable of being cured by section 292B. The decision distinguished cases where the amalgamation had not been disclosed or where the facts were materially different, and applied the settled rule that an assessment on a non-existent entity is a nullity.

Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings and the reassessment order were invalid and were quashed.

---