Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
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.