Just a moment...
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 notice and consequential assessment were valid when issued against a company that had already been struck off and had not been restored by the time of notice and assessment.
Analysis: The assessment was initiated under section 148 after notice under section 148A(b), and the assessment order was framed under sections 147 and 144. The company had been struck off prior to the notice, and the record did not show any restoration by the NCLT before the reassessment proceedings were completed. The earlier decision relied on by the Revenue was distinguished because, in that case, restoration had intervened and the deeming effect of restoration applied. Here, the reassessment proceeded against a non-existent entity, and the later application for revival did not cure the defect. The order treating the notice and assessment as invalid was therefore sustained.
Conclusion: The reassessment notice and assessment order were invalid and bad in law, and the Revenue's challenge failed.
Final Conclusion: The dismissal of the Revenue's appeal left undisturbed the deletion of the addition made in reassessment proceedings initiated against the struck off company.
Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment proceedings initiated and completed against a company that is non-existent on the date of notice and assessment are invalid unless the company has been restored so as to attract the statutory deeming effect of restoration.