2025 (2) TMI 827 - AT - Income Tax

Revision order u/s 263 on a deceased person - HELD THAT - Following the judgment in the case of Dharamraj 2022 (1) TMI 844 - DELHI HIGH COURT notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on a dead person was held to be null and void and all consequent proceedings/orders including the assessment order and the subsequent notices are equally tented and liable to be set aside. Similar view has been taken in the case of Mrs. Sripathi Subbaraya Manohara L/H Late Sripathi Subbaraya Gupta 2021 (7) TMI 695 - DELHI HIGH COURT wherein the High Court quashed the assessment and penalty orders passed on the deceased person. Since in the case on hand an order u/s 263 was passed by the Pr. CIT on the assessee who deceased on 28.03.2020 such an order is null and void and the same is hereby quashed. Appeal of assessee allowed.

Summary

The appeal in this case was filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak dated 04.03.2022 for the AY 2017-18 passed under section 263 of the Act. The issues presented and considered in this case are as follows:1. Whether an order passed under section 263 on a deceased person is valid.2. Whether the business income surrendered at the time of survey was liable to be added back under sections 68/69/69A/69B/69C of the Act.3. Whether the order passed by the Pr. CIT was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.The Appellate Tribunal considered the arguments presented by the assessee's counsel, who contended that the order passed on a deceased person is void ab initio. The counsel supported this argument with a death certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation, Panipat. The Tribunal also referred to previous judgments that supported the proposition that an order passed on a deceased person is null and void in the eyes of the law.The Tribunal analyzed the legal framework and precedents related to orders passed on deceased persons. It cited the case of Savita Kapila where the Delhi High Court quashed a notice issued under section 148 of the Act on a deceased assessee. The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Madras High Court in Alamelu Veerappan vs. ITO, which highlighted the limitations of section 159 of the Act in cases where proceedings were initiated after the assessee's death.Based on the legal principles established in previous judgments, the Tribunal concluded that the order passed under section 263 on the deceased assessee was null and void. Therefore, the Tribunal quashed the order and held that all subsequent proceedings were equally invalid. As a result, the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed.The significant holdings of this judgment include the Tribunal's determination that an order passed under section 263 on a deceased person is void ab initio, citing relevant legal precedents to support this conclusion.In summary, the Tribunal held that an order passed under section 263 on a deceased person is not valid and, therefore, quashed the order in this case.