LALIT KUMAR L/H OF LATE SH. BAL KISHAN,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण
िदʟी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िदʟी
ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आअसं.3507/िदʟी/2025 (िन.व. 2015-16)
Late Shri Bal Kishan,
Through Legal Heir Lalit Kumar,
C/o P Chauhan & Co.
1120, Tower-A, The I-Thum, Plot No. A-40,
Sector-62, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201301
PAN: AQEPP-2690-K
...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant
बनाम Vs.
Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1),
Faridabad, Haryana
..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent
अपीलाथŎ Ȫारा/Appellant by : Shri Pawan Chauhan, Chartered Accountant
ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Ms. Sudha Gupta, SR.DR
सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing
:
29/07/2025
घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement :
:
29/07/2025
आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)] dated 27.09.2024, for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. A perusal of the appeal file shows that the assessment order dated
17.03.2022 has been passed in the name of a dead person. The present appeal has been filed by the Legal Heir of the assessee. The LR’s of the assessee has 2
placed on record death certificate of Bal Kishan the original assessee. As per the death certificate Bal Kishan had died on 11.04.2017. 3. The appellant has filed written submissions along with relevant documents.
The notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the impugned assessment year was issued in the name of deceased Bal
Kishan on 28.03.2021 i.e. much after the death of Bal Kishan. Since, there was no response from the assessee’s side to the said notice and the subsequent notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act, the AO completed the assessment ex-parte invoking the provisions section 144 of the Act. The assessment was made u/s. 147 r.w.s.
144 r.w.s 144B of the Act vide order dated 17.03.2022. 4. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case Savita Kapila vs. Asst. CIT 118
taxmann.com 46 (Delhi) has held that there is no statutory obligation on the Legal
Heir to intimate the death of the assessee to the Revenue. The Hon’ble Delhi High
Court further held that where the notice has been issued u/s. 148 of the Act in the name of predeceased assessee, such notice could not have been validly served upon the assessee. Hence, the said notice is invalid and is liable to be quashed.
5. In the instant case, I find that the original assessee Bal Kishan had died on 11.04.2017, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued by the AO on 28.03.2021, hence, the notice was issued in the name of a dead person. The said notice was not validly severed upon the assessee, therefore, the subsequent proceedings emanating from such invalid notice are vitiated. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act in the name of a dead person and the assessment framed on the basis of said notice in the name of dead person is without juri iction, ergo, unsustainable.
3
6. In light of undisputed facts of the case and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi
High Court referred above, impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on Tue ay the 29th day of July, 2025. (VIKAS AWASTHY)
᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER
िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 08/08/2025
NV/-
ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant ,
2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent.
3. The PCIT/CIT(A)
4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी
5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file.
BY ORDER,
////
(Asstt.