2024 (5) TMI 765 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of assessment order passed on a dead person - legal heir of the assessee replied - AO has mentioned only the name of the deceased assessee and not that of the legal heir - HELD THAT - While framing the assessment order and issuing demand notice u/s. 156 AO has mentioned only the name of the deceased assessee and not that of the legal heir who was on record before the AO. It is well settled principle of law, when the AO did not substitute the name of the legal heir and proceed to make an assessment in the name of the deceased person, is in valid in law as held in the case of PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd 2019 (7) TMI 1449 - SUPREME COURT Assessment order passed by the AO on a dead person is not valid in the eyes of law and liable to be quashed. Appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment involves issues related to the validity of the assessment order passed on a deceased person, addition of unexplained cash deposits under section 69A, and the application of higher tax rate under section 115BBE.

Validity of Assessment Order on Deceased Person:
The appeal was filed against the appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) arising out of the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee, an individual deriving pension income from ONGC, filed a return of income declaring total income. The assessment was initiated due to a significant cash deposit made during the demonetization period. The legal heir of the deceased assessee participated in the assessment proceedings, providing necessary details. However, the Assessing Officer framed the assessment order in the name of the deceased person, leading to the appeal challenging the validity of the assessment order. The legal representative argued that the assessment order was invalid as it was passed on a dead person, despite prior information provided to the authorities regarding the death of the assessee. The Tribunal, citing legal precedents, held that the assessment order passed on a deceased person is not valid in the eyes of the law and consequently quashed the order.

Addition of Unexplained Cash Deposits under Section 69A:
The Assessing Officer treated the entire cash deposits in the bank accounts as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and taxed it at a higher rate under section 115BBE. The legal heir contested the addition of cash deposits, arguing that the amounts deposited did not belong to the appellant but to third parties. Despite explanations provided, the Assessing Officer upheld the addition. The Tribunal reviewed the case and found that the source of the cash deposits in the bank account was explained. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the addition made under section 69A was not justified and ruled in favor of the legal heir.

Application of Higher Tax Rate under Section 115BBE:
The Assessing Officer applied a higher tax rate under section 115BBE on the unexplained cash deposits. The legal heir challenged this decision, stating that the higher rate of taxation was not applicable in this case as the appellant was subjected to search and seizure actions before the relevant amendment. The Tribunal considered the arguments presented and concluded that the higher rate of taxation was not applicable in this scenario. Citing relevant legal principles and precedents, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Assessee.