filed in the name of Star
sports India private limited [ nonexistent entity] on
30/3/2016 which was signed by Mr Rishi Gaind ... amalgamated
company. Thus Revised ROI is in the name of a
nonexistent entity stating PAN of a nonexistent entity but
signed by the director
Glass LLP w.e.f
30.1.2015 therefore proceedings against the nonexistent entity may kindly be dropped.
The ld. counsel also submitted that despite said objection ... Tribunal submitted
that the reassessment order in the name of nonexistent entity is not valid and vitiated.
The ld. counsel has placed reliance
Department that the M/s Abhinav Cooperative Group Housing Society is
nonexistent entity. Therefore, in our opinion ... ground
that M/s Abhinav Cooperative Group Housing Society is nonexistent entity.
Therefore, in our considered opinion, the grounds of Appeal filed by the
assessee
said order has been passed in the name of an
nonexistent entity, the order passed by the learned TPO and the
consequential final assessment order ... said order has been passed in the name of an
nonexistent entity, the order passed by the learned TPO and the
consequential final asst order
Income Tax Act 1961 (the ACT)to
an nonexistent entity i.e.Siemens Building Technologies
ITA No. 1146/Mum/2018
Siemens Ltd., Mumbai.
-4-
Private ... held that assessment order passed on a nonexistent entity
is without jurisdiction and deserves to be set aside. The
facts of the case,before
Abbott India Ltd and therefore such
orders passed are on a nonexistent entity and consequently are
invalid and liable to be quashed. The learned authorized ... existent entity citing the permanent account number
of the nonexistent entity. He further relied upon the decision of the
honourable Supreme Court in case
entity which had no legal existence
in the eyes of Indian law and there being no mode of
procedure whereby such an entity was permitted ... learned Judge expressed the view that
the plaintiff firm was a nonexistent entity. But the order
which he subsequently made giving leave to amend seems
found that assessment is framed
in the name of nonexisting entity it does not remain a procedural
irregularity of the nature which could be cured
persons or 'a case of a suit brought by a nonexistent entity. That question, as I say, is one of fact ... plaintiff was really nonexistent and consequently whether the principle that a living person could not be substituted for a non-existent entity could be invoked
applicable in such a case. The
framing of assessment against a nonexistent
entity/person goes to the root of the matter
which
