Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
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.