The assessee-company, BSS, was amalgamated with BTC by order of the National Company Law Tribunal and came to be known as BGS. The return of income for the AY. 2014-15 was filed in the name of the amalgamating company since the process of amalgamation was not completed. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee-company had brought the factum of amalgamation to the notice of the Assessing Officer, who, however, passed the assessment order in the name of the amalgamating company making disallowance of the excess deduction claimed by the assessee u/s. 10AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.The Commissioner (Appeals) granted partial relief but dismissed the assessee’s objection holding that notice u/s. 143(2) was issued in the name of the amalgamating company much before the amalgamation had come into effect. On appeals by the Revenue and the assessee the Tribunal allowed the assessee’s appeal and observed that there was no dispute that the factum of amalgamation was brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. Despite knowing very well that the amalgamating company was not in existence at the time of passing the assessment order, the Assessing Officer had chosen to pass an assessment order in the name of the amalgamating company, BSS. Consequent to the amalgamation, BSS ceased to exist and, therefore, could not be regarded as a “person”. The fact that the assessee had participated in the assessment proceedings could not operate as estoppel against law. The assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer in the name of a non-existent entity was null and void ab initio. Accordingly, the assessment order was quashed. As a result, the Revenue’s appeal became infructuous.(AY.2014-15)