https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347630 The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the invalidation of the assessment order due to the naming discrepancy of the amalgamating company. The Court emphasized the necessity of correctly identifying the entity in assessment orders and clarified that participation in proceedings does not preclude the successor-in-interest from objecting to the assessment order's validity. The judgment highlighted that a procedural defect, such as incorrect naming, cannot be cured by mere participation, establishing the legal position on this matter. en-us Mon, 04 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Nov 2017 18:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347630 The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the invalidation of the assessment order due to the naming discrepancy of the amalgamating company. The Court emphasized the necessity of correctly identifying the entity in assessment orders and clarified that participation in proceedings does not preclude the successor-in-interest from objecting to the assessment order's validity. The judgment highlighted that a procedural defect, such as incorrect naming, cannot be cured by mere participation, establishing the legal position on this matter. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 04 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347630