Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Proceedings initiated, continued and concluded against an amalgamating company after it ceased to exist are unsustainable. Although liabilities, existing claims and pending proceedings devolve on the transferee under an amalgamation scheme, post-amalgamation proceedings concerning earlier liabilities must be instituted against the successor company. Reference to, knowledge of, or participation by the successor does not cure proceedings conducted in the name of the non-existent entity, particularly where the order does not address the disclosed amalgamation. The successor has locus to challenge such proceedings because any resulting liability may be fastened upon it. The HC quashed the show cause notice and adjudication order, while leaving merits open and permitting fresh lawful proceedings against the successor.
Proceedings initiated, continued and concluded against an amalgamating company after it ceased to exist are unsustainable. Although liabilities, existing claims and pending proceedings devolve on the transferee under an amalgamation scheme, post-amalgamation proceedings concerning earlier liabilities must be instituted against the successor company. Reference to, knowledge of, or participation by the successor does not cure proceedings conducted in the name of the non-existent entity, particularly where the order does not address the disclosed amalgamation. The successor has locus to challenge such proceedings because any resulting liability may be fastened upon it. The HC quashed the show cause notice and adjudication order, while leaving merits open and permitting fresh lawful proceedings against the successor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
