2024 (11) TMI 1098 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of Revision proceedings u/s 263 against dead assessee - As per CIT AO had completed the assessment without carrying out the necessary and proper enquiry in respect of tax treatment of interest received on compensation or enhanced compensation - assessee submitted that notice u/s. 263 was given in the name of the deceased person - assessee informed the CIT and thereafter notice was given to the legal heir, but in the final order the PAN Number was mentioned of the deceased person HELD THAT - It is noted that the Coordinate Bench of Amritar in case of Avtar Singh 2023 (8) TMI 1566 - ITAT AMRITSAR on similar circumstances had held that if the person is deceased and legal heir has been brought on record, mentioning of PAN of the deceased person in the order will render the order a nullity. No contrary decision has been shown to us. Accordingly, respectfully following the precedent of the Amritsar Coordinate Bench, as aforesaid, we quash the order of the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act. Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of notice and order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
2. Jurisdictional infirmity in issuing notice and passing order in the name of a deceased person
3. Validity of unsigned notice under Section 263 of the Act
4. Assessment order under Section 143(3) and its cancellation under Section 263
5. Consideration of necessary inquiries by the Assessing Officer
6. Misinterpretation of the nature of assessment order by the Principal Commissioner
7. Taxability of interest received on enhanced compensation
8. Lack of application of mind in passing order under Section 263
9. Legality of proceedings initiated under Section 263
10. Adequacy of consideration of facts and material by the Principal Commissioner
11. Unjust observations in the case

Analysis:

1. The Assessee challenged the validity of the notice and order issued under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, alleging that they were illegal, time-barred, and without jurisdiction. The grounds included issues regarding the deceased person's name, the validity of the unsigned notice, and the legality of the order based on the notice's validity.

2. The Principal Commissioner set aside the assessment order under Section 143(3) due to lack of proper inquiry into the tax treatment of interest on enhanced compensation. The order was deemed erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue's interest, leading to the direction for a fresh assessment after necessary inquiries and verifications.

3. The Assessee contended that the notice was issued in the deceased person's name, rendering the order null and void. The Tribunal, following a precedent, held that mentioning the deceased person's PAN in the order made it a nullity, leading to the quashing of the Principal Commissioner's order under Section 263.

4. As a result of quashing the order under Section 263, the Tribunal found the other grounds raised by the Assessee to be academic and unnecessary for adjudication, ultimately allowing the Assessee's appeal.

This detailed analysis covers the various issues raised in the legal judgment, outlining the arguments presented by the parties and the Tribunal's decision on each matter.