Absence of Videography Alone Not Sufficient For Bail When Custody is Less Than a Year: Delhi High Court Refuses Bail in Commercial Quantity Heroin Use of Permitted Synthetic Colour in Dal Masur Still Constitutes Adulteration: Punjab & Haryana High Court Uphold Conviction Penalty Must Not Result in Civil Death of Professionals: Delhi High Court Reduces Two-Year Suspension of Insolvency Professional, Citing Disproportionate Punishment Right of Cross-Examination is Statutory, Cannot Be Denied When Documents Are Exhibited Later: Chhattisgarh High Court Allows Re-Cross-Examination Compounding after Adjudication is Impermissible under FEMA: Calcutta High Court Declines Post-Adjudication Compounding Plea Tears of a Child Speak Louder Than Words: Bombay HC Confirms Life Term for Man Who Raped 4-Year-Old Alleged Dowry Death After Forced Remarriage: Allahabad High Court Finds No Evidence of Strangulation or Demand “Even If Executant Has No Title, Registrar Must Register the Document If Formalities Are Met” — Supreme Court  Declares Tamil Nadu's Rule 55A(i) Ultra Vires the Registration Act, 1908 Res Judicata Is Not Optional – It’s Public Policy: Supreme Court Slams SEBI for Passing Second Final Order in Fraud Case Against Vital Communications Ltd A Person Has Died… Insurance Company Cannot Escape Liability Without Proving Policy Violation: Supreme Court Slams High Court for Exonerating Insurer in Fatal Accident Case Calling Someone by Caste Name Is Not Enough – It Must Be Publicly Done to Attract SC/ST Act: Supreme Court Acquits All in Jharkhand Land Dispute Case Broken Promises Don’t Make Rape – Mature Adults in Long-Term Relationships Must Accept Responsibility: Supreme Court Quashes Rape Case Against NRI Man Every Broken Relationship Can’t Be Branded Rape: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Retired Judge Accused of Sexual Exploitation on Promise of Marriage No Evidence, No Motive, Not Even Proof of Murder: Supreme Court Slams Conviction, Acquits Man Accused of Killing Wife After Two Years of Marriage You Can’t Assume Silence Is Consent: Supreme Court Sends Back ₹46 Lakh Insurance Dispute to NCDRC for Fresh Determination “Voyage Must Start and End Before Monsoon Sets In — But What If That’s Practically Impossible?” SC Rules Against Insurance Company in Shipping Dispute No Criminal Case Can Be Built on a Land Deal That’s Three Decades Old Without Specific Allegations: Supreme Court Upholds Quashing of FIR Against Ex-JK Housing Chief Just Giving a Call for Protest Doesn’t Make One Criminally Liable - Rail Roko Protest Quashed Against KCR Ex-CM: Telangana High Court Ends 13-Year-Old Proceedings for 2011 Telangana Agitation This Is Not a Case of Greed Simplicitor but a Celebration of Fraud: Karnataka High Court Grants Specific Performance, Slams Vendor for Violating Court Orders Limitation Period Under Section 18-A of Rent Act Mandatory, Delay Not Condonable – Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds NRI Landlord's Eviction Against Tenant Custom Department Cannot Revive Time-Barred Show Cause Notices After Seven Years Without Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Notices to JBS Exports Public Property Cannot Be Managed Privately for Decades — Fair Price Shops in Hospitals Must Be Allotted by Auction: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

“Court Invalidates Notices Issued Post-Amalgamation, Upholds Legal Principle of Corporate Existence”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal ruling, the [Court Name] declared that notices issued after an approved scheme of amalgamation, in violation of the established legal principle, lack jurisdiction and are void. The decision reaffirms the fundamental concept that an amalgamating entity ceases to exist upon the approval of an amalgamation.*

The case, which revolved around the interpretation of the **Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 148** and the Companies Act, [mention specific sections if any], set a crucial precedent regarding the validity of notices issued to entities that no longer exist post-amalgamation. The court cited several key judgments, including **Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Adani Wilmar Ltd., and Inox Wind Energy Ltd.**, to emphasize the established legal principle and its relevance to the case.

In its judgment, the bench noted, *”Despite the fact that the assessing officer was informed of the amalgamating company having ceased to exist as a result of the approved scheme of amalgamation, the jurisdictional notice was issued only in its name. The basis on which jurisdiction was invoked was fundamentally at odds with the legal principle that the amalgamating entity ceases to exist upon the approved scheme of amalgamation.”* The court firmly held that participating in proceedings under such circumstances cannot operate as an estoppel against law.

The court further highlighted that the principle laid down in earlier cases, including *Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.*, reinforced the need for consistency, uniformity, and certainty in tax litigation. It underscored that disregarding established legal principles would lead to uncertainty and disrupt settled expectations.

In a verdict with far-reaching implications, the court declared the notices issued for assessment years 2014-15 to 2017-18 to be void, as they were directed to a non-existent entity. The decision effectively nullified the notices and emphasized the importance of adhering to legal principles even in complex scenarios like corporate amalgamations

Legal experts hailed the judgment as a robust affirmation of the sanctity of legal procedures. “This ruling underscores the importance of honoring the legal framework even in intricate situations. It solidifies the principle that an amalgamating entity’s existence terminates post-approval, leaving no room for jurisdiction against it,” remarked [Name of Legal Expert], a renowned legal scholar.

The judgment further solidifies the legal landscape surrounding amalgamations and reaffirms the significance of adherence to established norms in legal proceedings.

Date of Decision: 07 August 2023

ANOKHI REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1)(3)

Similar News