9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 766 - AT - Income TaxValidity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Notice issued in the name of the deceased person - HELD THAT - It is a settled position of law neither re-opening notice can be issued in the name of the deceased person nor the same can be continued against the deceased. The factum of death of the assessee on 20.06.2011 was already in the knowledge of the AO. Under these circumstances is the revenue who is to take proper step while issuing notice u/s 147 of the Act instead it is finalized in the name of the deceased. In this regard, we have considered the judgment passed in the matter of Shri Rajesh G. Shah 2021 (7) TMI 1323 - ITAT AHMEDABAD and in the case of Savita Kapila 2020 (7) TMI 441 - DELHI HIGH COURT where it has been held that in the absence of a statutory provision the duty cannot be cast upon legal representative to intimate factum of death of assessee to department and thus, where AO issued a notice to the assessee u/s 148 of the Act after his death and in such a case it could not have been validly served upon the assessee the said notice being invalid is required to be quashed - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Validity of notice for re-opening of Assessment Year under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act issued in the name of a deceased person. Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad concerned the validity of a notice for re-opening an Assessment Year under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act issued in the name of a deceased person. The Tribunal considered the case where the legal heir of the deceased assessee received the notice and argued for quashing the proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the notice under Section 148 was issued in the name of the deceased person, even though the death of the assessee was duly brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer. The counsel for the assessee relied on various judgments to support the argument for quashing the proceedings against the dead person. The Tribunal observed that it is a settled principle of law that a re-opening notice issued in the name of a deceased person is not tenable. The Tribunal referred to previous judgments where it was held that such notices cannot be continued against legal representatives. The Tribunal emphasized that the duty to inform the department about the death of the assessee cannot be cast upon the legal representative. The Tribunal highlighted that in the absence of a statutory provision, the legal representative is not obligated to intimate the death of the assessee to the department. Considering the facts and legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the notice issued in the name of the deceased person was invalid. The Tribunal held that the proceedings were void ab initio and subsequently quashed the notice under Section 148 of the Act. The appeal by the assessee was allowed based on the findings regarding the invalidity of the notice issued in the name of the deceased person. In summary, the Tribunal's judgment focused on the legal principle that re-opening notices cannot be issued in the name of deceased persons and cannot be continued against their legal representatives. The Tribunal emphasized that the duty to inform the department about the death of the assessee does not lie with the legal representative. Based on this legal position and previous judgments, the Tribunal declared the notice issued in the name of the deceased person as invalid and quashed the proceedings.
|
