9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 1135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 (11) TMI 1196 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT ] has also held that notice and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom in the name of deceased assessee are not sustainable. Assessee appeal allowed. - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari And Hon'ble Shri Justice Devnarayan Mishra For the Petitioner : Shri Arun Dwivedi, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Veena Mandlik, Advocate ORDER Heard finally with the consent of parties. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (referred to as 'the Act of 1961' hereinafter) for the assessment year 2015-16 dated 08.04.2022 issued in case No. ITBA/AS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an essential condition to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act of 1961 is that the notice be issued to the person who is alive and the same cannot be issued to a dead person. He further submitted that the deceased husband of the petitioner had passed away on 09.11.2020, as is evident from his death certificate. The settled legal principle in such cases is that a notice issued in the name of the dead person is unenforceable in law. Keeping this legal position in mind, coupled with the fact that the petitioner had already intimated about the death of her husband Lt. Shri Kamal Kumar Saxena, the Revenue is and would not be justified at all in contending that they having the knowledge about th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent/Income Tax Department by placing reliance on the various judgments of the Apex Court as well as the High Court submitted that petition against order u/s 148A(d)/Notice u/s 148 of the Act of 1961 for initiation of reassessment proceedings is not tenable as all such objection have to be raised before the Assessing Officer as it is not a final adjudication of the matter where no further statutory remedy against the adjudication order is available. [Salil Gulati Vs. ACIT(2023(455 ITR 29 (SC) , Ajay Gupta Vs. ITO 454 ITR 794 (SC) (2023), Seema Gupta Vs ITO 455 ITR 504 2023(SC) , Anshul Jain Vs. PCIT Specal Leave to Appeal(C) No. 14823/2022, Harinder Singh Bedi Vs. UOI(MP) W.P. NO. 22734/2022, and Amit Homes Pvt. Ltd. V/S DCIT W.P. N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atutory obligation to intimate the death of the assessee to the revenue. 12. The Madras High Court in the case of Alamelu Verappan(supra) has observed as under: Nothing has been placed before this Court by the Revenue to show that there is a statutory obligation on the part of the legal representatives of the deceased assessee to immediately intimate the death of the assessee to take steps to cancel the PAN registration. 13. Similar view has been taken by the High Court of Mumbai in Sumit Balkrishna Gupta Vs. Asstt. CIT[2019] 103 taxmann.com 188/262 Taxman 61/414 ITR 292/104 CCH 0379 MumHC] wherein it has been observed as under: 7. The issue of a notice under Section 148 of the Act is a foundation for reopening of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... name of deceased assessee are not sustainable. 15. In view of the above and that various High Courts as well this Court has recently observed that the notice issued to a dead person for reopening of assessment of a dead person is null and void, this Court holds that the notice and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom in the name of the deceased assessee are not sustainable. 16. Consequently, the impugned notice dated 08.04.2022 passed in case No. ITBA/AST/F/148_1/2022-23/23/1042654010 (1) as well as order u/s 148A(d) of the Act of 1961 dated 07.04.2022 for the assessment year 2015- 2016 are quashed and all actions in furtherance thereto are prohibited. However, liberty is given to the respondent to reinitiate proceedin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
