https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430752 Restoration of a struck-off company under section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 places it as nearly as possible in the same position as if its name had not been struck off, so its liabilities and pending proceedings continue. A writ petition challenging a section 148 reassessment notice failed where it was filed by a director in his individual capacity, while the company itself had not challenged the notice or the restoration order; the challenge was therefore not maintainable and had become infructuous. The notice was not rendered invalid merely because it had been issued while the company stood struck off, as restoration related back and preserved the company's existence for the reassessment proceedings. en-us Thu, 17 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Feb 2023 14:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430752 Restoration of a struck-off company under section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 places it as nearly as possible in the same position as if its name had not been struck off, so its liabilities and pending proceedings continue. A writ petition challenging a section 148 reassessment notice failed where it was filed by a director in his individual capacity, while the company itself had not challenged the notice or the restoration order; the challenge was therefore not maintainable and had become infructuous. The notice was not rendered invalid merely because it had been issued while the company stood struck off, as restoration related back and preserved the company's existence for the reassessment proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 17 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430752