Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

82. It is by now well settled in law that any notice or order issued in the name of nonexistent entity which has since stood merged/ amalgamated / dissolved is ab initio void and bad in law. Once it is found that the notice assuming jurisdiction is issued in the name of a non-existent entity, then the assessment framed consequent thereto, is non-est in the eyes of law. In this case, the mandatory notice to scrutinize the assessment of the amalgamated company (appointed date of amalgamation dated w.e.f. 01.04.2015) u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 05.10.2018 in the name of the already amalgamated company/non-existing entity [M/s IQCIPL] was void ab initio and therefore, the AO usurped without jurisdiction to assess the non-existing entity (M/s. IQCIPL). So the framing of assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act without assuming valid jurisdiction is null in the eyes of law. It is settled law that the issuance of mandatory notice in the name of a non-existent entity is an incurable defect and cannot be treated as a procedural irregularity and section 292BB of the Act cannot come to the rescue of revenue. Instead it is a jurisdictional defect which renders the proceedings / assessment non-est in the eyes of law. This legal proposition finds support in the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of M/s. Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Vs. CIT (1990) 186 ITR 278 (SC) and M/s. Spice Infotainment Ltd. Vs. CIT (2012) 247 CTR 500 (Del) which decision was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. We therefore find that notice issued by the AO u/s 143(2) of the Act in the name of the non-existing entity M/s. IQCIPL rendered the assessment order dated 31.12.2018 to be a nullity in the eyes of law. The relevant findings of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) is reproduced hereunder: