https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388269 The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to quash the assessment order due to a change in the company name, ruling that framing an order in the name of a non-existent entity is a jurisdictional defect. The addition of bogus share capital and unaccounted commission paid was also deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) and upheld by the Tribunal. The Tribunal cited precedents and Supreme Court rulings to support the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing the importance of proper assessment procedures and jurisdictional integrity. en-us Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:31:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388269 The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to quash the assessment order due to a change in the company name, ruling that framing an order in the name of a non-existent entity is a jurisdictional defect. The addition of bogus share capital and unaccounted commission paid was also deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) and upheld by the Tribunal. The Tribunal cited precedents and Supreme Court rulings to support the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing the importance of proper assessment procedures and jurisdictional integrity. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388269