Loading judgment…
Facts
The original assessee, Sh. Sarbachan Singh, passed away on 18.02.2019. A notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 28.03.2019 in the name of the deceased. The assessment order was subsequently passed on 19.12.2019 in the name of the legal heir, Sh. Lalit Kumar.
Held
The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued in the name of a deceased person, and no valid notice was served on the legal heir. Therefore, the entire reassessment proceeding is vitiated.
Key Issues
Whether the reassessment proceedings are valid when the notice under Section 148 was issued in the name of a deceased assessee without proper service on the legal heir.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, DELHI
Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. NFAC, New Delhi, dated 10.12.2024 arising out of the Assessment Order passed by the ITO, Ward 2(2)(4) Ghaziabad, dated 19.12.2019 under Section 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2012-13.
The brief facts leading to the case are that the original assessee namely Sh. Sarbachan Singh left for his heavenly abode on 18.02.2019 at Sarvodaya Hospital & Research Centre, Ghaziabad. On 28.03.2019 a notice under Section 148 of the Act claimed to have been issued in the name of the said assessee Sh. Sarbachan Singh since deceased, as it appears from the note sheet produced by the Ld. AR copy whereof has also been annexed to the paper book filed by the assessee before us. Subsequently, the assessment order was passed on 19.12.2019 in the name of the legal heir of the original assessee Sh. Lalit Kumar as reflecting from the order impugned before us. Under Section 147/144 of the Act the order of assessment speaks of notice being sent through speed post on the address of the assessee on the information provided in the AIR i.e. notice is being served upon the legal heir of the original assessee Sh. Lalit Kumar as before us. However, such issuance and service of any notice under Section 148 of the Act is not reflecting from the original order sheet furnished before us by the Ld. DR copy whereof has also been annexed to the paper book filed by the assessee.
At this juncture, the Ld. Senior Counsel Shri C.S. Aggarwal appearing for the assessee joins issue to this effect that firstly when the assessee already died on 18.02.2019 the notice as claimed to have been issued dated 28.03.2019 under Section 148 of the Act in the name of the deceased could not have been issued. Secondly, the heading of the order sheet entry speaks of Late Sh. Sarbachan Singh, PAN No.DCKPS2922C, Assessment Year 2012-13, legal heir Sh. Lalit Kumar, PAN No.AHNPK3992K which has been referred by the Ld. Senior Counsel Shri C.S. Agarwal appearing for the assessee contending that when the fact of demise of the original assessee on 18.02.2019 has not made known to the authorities concerned, it could never be possible for them to sent a notice in the name of legal heir neither it is evident from note sheet that such notice dated 28.03.2019 has been issued in the name of the legal heir. The legal heir was never brought on record by that time when the notice has been claimed to have been issued and served on 28.03.2019 reflecting from the note sheet placed before us; in fact veracity and/or validity of said order sheet is under challenge before us by the Ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the assessee.
Such contention made by the Ld. AR has not been able to be controverted by the Ld. DR for this particular reason that she has not been able to show any notice issued in the name of the legal heir of the assessee under Section 148 of the Act as claim to have been issued and served by the Ld. AO as reflected in the Assessment Order dated 19.12.2019 impugned before us; neither any notice in the name of the assessee have been placed on record which ought to have been issued and served upon the assessee during his lifetime. Under this particular fact and circumstances of the matter in the absence of any valid notice issued and served upon the original assessee or the legal heir of the assessee before us, the entire proceeding is vitiated and therefore, liable to be quashed, as is the crux of the submissions made by the Ld. Senior counsel before us. Having regard to this fact we have considered the judgment relied upon by the Ld. AR passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Savita Kapila Vs. ACIT, 426 ITR 502 (Del) (2020) and in the case of Alamelu Veerappan Vs. ITO, reported in (2018) (6) TMI 760 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras which on identical facts and circumstances of the matter quashed the proceedings in the absence of notice not being issued in the name of the legal heir of the assessee.
Thus, having regard to the entire aspect of the matter in my considered opinion as admittedly no notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued and served in the name of the legal heir as claimed to have been done by the Ld. AO in order of assessment dated 19.12.2019, the entire proceeding is vitiated; the reassessment proceeding as has been finalized on a wrong footing the same is, therefore, found to have no legs to stand on and thus, the entire proceeding is quashed.
The appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26.06.2023