2024 (12) TMI 325 - SCH - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment against deceased - Rights of legal representatives - initial Notices being issued in the name of a dead person and the subsequent participation of the legal representatives in the proceedings before the Assessing Office - High Court 2023 (7) TMI 1506 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT as noted that since the legal representatives were substituted by the respondents and thereafter the proceeding could be continued, disposed of the Writ Petition by holding that the legal representatives could take all contentions available to them except the fact that the initial notice was issued in the name of a dead person and consequently disposed of the Writ Petition - main impediment in the case of the appellant herein is that the High Court has curtailed their right to take a contention that the impugned Notices were initially issued in the name of a dead person; that solely because the appellant as a legal representative subsequently responded to the notices would not imply that the proceeding initiated was valid HELD THAT - We set aside paragraph 4 of the impugned order and we permit the appellant herein to take the contention with regard to the initial Notice being issued in the name of a dead person-original assessee being defective and also take all other contentions available to the appellant before the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the impugned order to that extent is set aside. It is needless to observe that the Assessing Officer shall consider all contentions to be raised by the appellant herein on their own merits and in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
Legality and correctness of the order of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition, Reserving all contentions to be taken by the appellant, Initial Notice issued to a dead person, Proceedings for reassessment commenced against a dead person, Rights of legal representatives in proceedings, Recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, Liberty to pursue all rights and remedies, High Court's restriction on taking a contention regarding the initial notice, Validity of proceedings initiated against a dead person, Reservation of liberty to raise the contention before the Assessing Officer.

Analysis:
The Supreme Court's judgment dealt with the challenge to the order of the Bombay High Court in a Writ Petition concerning the legality of initiating proceedings against a dead person. The initial Notice under Section 148A(b) was issued in the name of a deceased individual, and subsequent communications were made to the legal representatives. The High Court allowed the legal representatives to continue the proceedings but restricted them from challenging the initial notice issued to a dead person. However, the Supreme Court considered the recent judgment in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, allowing assessees to raise all contentions except those concluded by the said judgment. The appellant sought to reserve the right to challenge the validity of the proceedings initiated against a dead person, which the Supreme Court found reasonable and permitted. The impugned order was set aside to allow the appellant to raise the contention regarding the defective initial notice and all other contentions before the Assessing Officer.

The Supreme Court emphasized that the Assessing Officer must consider all contentions raised by the appellant on their merits and in accordance with the law. By remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer, the Court refrained from expressing any opinion on the contentions raised before them. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside to permit the appellant to challenge the validity of the proceedings initiated against a dead person. The Court granted the liberty to the appellant to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer, ensuring a fair consideration of the case based on the legal provisions and the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in a similar matter.