Jurisdictional sanction requirements bar reassessment when approval comes from an authority lacking statutory competence under the applicable framewor...
Recorded sales receipts cannot be reassessed as unexplained cash credits, eliminating the basis for consequential alleged commission expenditure addit...
Sufficient cause for delayed income-tax appeals requires bona fide diligence; unsubstantiated counsel illness and assessee inaction defeat condonation...
TNMM Segmentation Limits Transfer-Pricing Adjustments to Associated-Enterprise Transactions and Requires Turnover-Based Comparable Selection for IT Se...
Assessment proceedings and consequent demand and penalty notices issued in the name of an amalgamating/transferor company are void once a court-sanctioned scheme of amalgamation has taken effect because the transferor ceases to exist; continuing proceedings in the name of the dissolved entity therefore involve a jurisdictional error. The High Court applied the principle that proceedings must be in the name of the existing legal entity, relied on prior authoritative decisions (distinguishing contrary facts), and quashed the impugned notices and order while noting the Revenue may initiate fresh proceedings against the amalgamated company if legally entitled.
Assessment proceedings and consequent demand and penalty notices issued in the name of an amalgamating/transferor company are void once a court-sanctioned scheme of amalgamation has taken effect because the transferor ceases to exist; continuing proceedings in the name of the dissolved entity therefore involve a jurisdictional error. The High Court applied the principle that proceedings must be in the name of the existing legal entity, relied on prior authoritative decisions (distinguishing contrary facts), and quashed the impugned notices and order while noting the Revenue may initiate fresh proceedings against the amalgamated company if legally entitled.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
