On writ the Court held that though the Assessing Officer who issued the notice was based outside the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court, the notice was served on the petitioner within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. The petitioner, who was required to defend the notice at Mumbai, had its registered office within the jurisdiction of the court. A part of the cause of action having arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the court, the petition was maintainable. Court also held that \u00a0there was neither legal basis nor jurisdiction with the Assessing Officer to issue the notice under section 148A(b), pass an order under section 148A(b) and issue the notice under section 148 to a non-existing entity UB. Once the amalgamating company had ceased to exist as a result of the scheme of amalgamation approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, there was no warrant in law for the Assessing Officer to proceed against a non-existent company. The notices at the threshold were illegal, invalid and non est.(AY. 2017-18)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Territorial Jurisdiction-Notice issued by Assessing Officer outside territorial jurisdiction of High Court-Notice served on petitioner who is assessee within territorial jurisdiction of High Court-Petitioner required to defend notice issued on it at Mumbai-Part of cause of action arising within territorial jurisdiction of High Court maintainable-Notice-Amalgamation of companies-Notice issued to non-existent amalgamating company Intimation of amalgamation given to Department-Reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated against non-existent entity-Notices and order invalid and non est.[S. 147, 148, 148A(b),148A(d), Art. 226] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-60331","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-fH5","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60331","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=60331"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60331\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":60332,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60331\/revisions\/60332"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60331"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60331"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60331"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}