Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
A reopening notice issued under section 148 in the name of a company already struck off from the register is invalid because jurisdiction cannot be assumed over a non-existent entity. Participation by an ex-director does not cure the defect, and the consequential reassessment order under section 144 read with section 147 falls with the invalid notice. Section 250 of the Companies Act, 2013 did not assist the Revenue because no subsisting liability or obligation of the struck-off company remained on the date of reopening. The notice and reassessment were quashed.
A reopening notice issued under section 148 in the name of a company already struck off from the register is invalid because jurisdiction cannot be assumed over a non-existent entity. Participation by an ex-director does not cure the defect, and the consequential reassessment order under section 144 read with section 147 falls with the invalid notice. Section 250 of the Companies Act, 2013 did not assist the Revenue because no subsisting liability or obligation of the struck-off company remained on the date of reopening. The notice and reassessment were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
