https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789761 Where a company had amalgamated and ceased to exist, transfer pricing and assessment proceedings had to be initiated against the successor entity; an order issued in the name and PAN of the non-existent amalgamated company was a substantive jurisdictional defect, not a curable technical error. The assessee had informed the tax authorities of the merger, yet the transfer pricing order, draft assessment order and final assessment order were all passed against the ceased entity. Participation by the assessee could not validate proceedings against a dead person in law. The impugned orders were therefore invalid and void ab initio, and the challenge to their validity succeeded. en-us Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Apr 2026 08:03:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789761 Where a company had amalgamated and ceased to exist, transfer pricing and assessment proceedings had to be initiated against the successor entity; an order issued in the name and PAN of the non-existent amalgamated company was a substantive jurisdictional defect, not a curable technical error. The assessee had informed the tax authorities of the merger, yet the transfer pricing order, draft assessment order and final assessment order were all passed against the ceased entity. Participation by the assessee could not validate proceedings against a dead person in law. The impugned orders were therefore invalid and void ab initio, and the challenge to their validity succeeded. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789761