Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
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 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
