https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348705 The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the validity of the assessment order in the name of a non-existing company. The Tribunal emphasized the use of PAN numbers to differentiate between entities and upheld the assessment's validity. Subsequently, the Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to adjudicate the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, ultimately allowing both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's Cross Objection. The case underscores the significance of accurate assessment procedures in merger and acquisition scenarios for proper identification of entities. en-us Fri, 22 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Sep 2017 09:14:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348705 The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the validity of the assessment order in the name of a non-existing company. The Tribunal emphasized the use of PAN numbers to differentiate between entities and upheld the assessment's validity. Subsequently, the Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to adjudicate the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, ultimately allowing both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's Cross Objection. The case underscores the significance of accurate assessment procedures in merger and acquisition scenarios for proper identification of entities. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348705