9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctional notice u/s 143(2) was issued against the dead person and the assessment order has also been passed against the dead person on his PAN without bringing on record all his legal representatives, therefore, the said assessment order and the subsequent notices are null and void and are liable to be set aside. Consequently, the impugned notice issued u/s 143(2) and the impugned assessment order is set aside along with all consequential proceedings and notices. - W.P.(C) 12215/2021 - - - Dated:- 9-11-2022 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA Petitioner Through: Mr Rohit Jain, Mr Aniket D. Agrawal, Ms Mansha Sharma, Advocates. Respondent Through: Mr Ajit Sharma, Sr. Stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in his capacity as a legal representative. In the said ITR it was duly verified and declared that the ITR was being filed by the Petitioner in his capacity as a representative of the deceased Assessee. 4. He states that the impugned statutory notice dated 22nd September, 2019 under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued by the Assessing Officer ( AO ) for the assessment year under consideration for limited scrutiny. The said notice was issued in the name of the deceased Assessee. The said notice suffered from a fundamental jurisdictional error as it was issued in the name of a dead person and the scrutiny proceedings were proposed in the case of a dead person. The said notice neither mentioned the name of the legal heirs nor the PAN numbe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent order dated 30 th September, 2021 passed under Section 143(3) for the complete FY 2017-18 and the accompanying notices of demand and penalty issued under Section 156 and Section 270(A) of the Act respectively, are illegal and without jurisdiction. 8. The learned senior standing counsel for the respondent states that there is no dispute on the facts. He agrees that the legal issue raised in this petition is covered by judgment of this Court in Savita Kapila vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax as the initial notice dated 22nd September, 2019 (which is the jurisdictional notice) and the assessment order dated 30 th September, 2021 has been issued in the name of the deceased Assessee and for the PAN of the said Assessee. 9. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a condition precedent for exercise of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess under section 147 of the Act. The want of valid notice affects the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to proceed with the assessment and thus, affects the the validity of the proceedings for assessment or reassessment. A notice issued under section 148 of the Act against a dead person is invalid, unless the legal representative submits to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer without raising any objection. Consequently, in view of the above, a reopening notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 issued in the name of a deceased-assessee is null and void. Also, no notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 was ever issued upon the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inate Bench of this court has held, (page 291 of 414 ITR) This court is of the opinion that the absence of any provision in the Act, to fasten revenue liability upon a deceased individual, in the absence of pending or previously instituted proceedings which is really what the present case is all about, renders fatal the effort of the Revenue to impose the tax burden upon a legal representative . There is no statutory requirement imposing an obligation upon legal heirs to intimate the death of the assessee. ........ 10. The above judgment was followed by this Court in W .P.(C) No. 2678/2020 titled Mrs. Sripathi Subbaraya Manohara vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and another. 11. In the present case as admit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
