2020 (2) TMI 796 - HC - GST

Validity of order passed against a deceased - Section 93 of CGST Act not followed - service of SCN - HELD THAT - It appears that the respondent does not raise any serious dispute as to the factual assertion made by the petitioner that the assessee concerned (who appears to be the paternal grandfather of the petitioner herein) is said to be one of the legal hairs of the deceased assessee as the petitioner's father who is the son of the assessee has died as early as on 27.03.2018 as evident from Ext.P3 death certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, which is much before the rendering of the impugned Ext.P3 series of the assessment orders issued in March 2019 - Since, that appears to be the undisputed position, it is only to be held that Ext.P3 series of assessment orders rendered as late as in March 2019 has been passed as against an assessee who is already dead by then and therefore, the impugned assessment orders is a nullity in the eye of law. The 1st respondent will be at liberty to take fresh action in the said assessment proceedings, after ascertaining from the competent Revenue Officials as to who all are the legal representatives or legal heirs of the said deceased assessee and then the respondent will be at liberty to render reasonable opportunity of being heard to such legal representatives and then finalise the assessment proceedings in the manner known to law. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Legality and arbitrariness of orders Exts.P3 to P3(1).
2. Compliance with Section 93 of CGST Act.
3. Service of show cause notices.
4. Validity of assessment orders against a deceased individual.
5. Legal representatives or heirs in assessment proceedings.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the legality and arbitrariness of orders Exts.P3 to P3(1) on the grounds that no orders can be passed against a deceased individual under the statute, Section 93 of CGST Act provisions were not followed, and show cause notices were not served by the 1st respondent. The petitioner sought to quash these orders through the writ petition.

2. The Court considered the plea that the assessment orders against a deceased individual were null and void. It was established that the individual in question had passed away before the assessment orders were issued, making the orders a legal nullity. The Court directed the 1st respondent to identify the legal representatives or heirs of the deceased assessee and provide them with an opportunity to be heard before finalizing the assessment proceedings in accordance with the law.

3. The Court clarified that its intervention was solely based on the fact that the assessment orders were issued against a deceased individual, rendering them invalid. Other issues were left open for further consideration. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations and directions, allowing the 1st respondent to take fresh action in the assessment proceedings after identifying the legal representatives or heirs of the deceased assessee.

This judgment highlights the importance of legal compliance and due process in assessment proceedings, emphasizing the need for proper representation and adherence to statutory provisions, especially when dealing with cases involving deceased individuals.