ANITA BARUI, LEGAL HEIR OF KRISHNENDU BARUI (DECD.),KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 43(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1215/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 August 2026AY 2018-20197 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the penalty order was passed against a dead person, as the assessee had died before the order was passed and the department was aware of his death. Therefore, the order was a nullity.

What were the facts?

The assessee was involved in bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 15,88,632/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed a portion of these purchases and initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed on limitation.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty order passed against a deceased assessee is valid. Whether the department had knowledge of the assessee's death prior to passing the penalty order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 37,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No 1215/KOL/2026 Assessment Year- 2018-19 Anita Barui,..............................................................................................................Appellant Legal Heir of Krishnendu Barui(Decd.) 543, Jessore Road, Dumdum, Kolkata- 700028 [PAN No. ASTPB3370P ] Vs. I.T.O. Ward- 43(1).................................…………..…………………....……….Respondent 3, Govt. Place (West), Kolkata- 700001 Appearances by: Gautam Banerjee, FCA., appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : July 09, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : August 14 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.01.2026 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), passed under Section 270A of the Assessment Year 2018-19 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2.

The brief facts of the case of the assessee is that as per the information available with the Department, the assessee was involved in transaction with Sudipta Das, Prop. Of M/s Shree Laxmi Enterprises one of the ITC fraud cases detected by CBIC. The assessee made bogus purchases amounting to Rs.

ITA No.1215/Kol/2026 Assessment Year- 2018-19 15,88,632/- from the above entity during the year under consideration. The case was reopened u/s 148 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 dated 26.03.2022. In response to notice U/s 148 of the Act, the assessee filed return of Income declaring total income of Rs. 11,91,270/-.During the course of assessment proceedings various opportunities were provided to the assessee from time to time. The assessee has submitted reply to all the notices. However, the assessee failed to substantiate the genuineness of transactions made with Sudipta Das, Prop. Of M/s. Shree Laxmi Enterprises.During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee could not prove the genuineness of the purchase of Rs. 1588632/- Therefore, the estimation of the difference in price of bogus purchase and grey market is estimated at GST Rate on product (18% plus additional discount margin of 7%estimated in these products and thus 25% of the purchase (of Rs. 15,88,632/-) shown from the bogus supplier amounting to Rs. 3,97.158/ was disallowed u/s 37of the Income- Tax Act, 1961.Penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act were Initiated for under- reporting in consequence of mis-reporting of income for AY 2018-19 Penalty of Rs. 3,32,934/- u/s 270A was levied.

Aggrieved by the said order, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) wherein appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on the issue of limitation.

Being aggrieved by ad dissatisfied, assessee preferred appeal before us. 2

ITA No.1215/Kol/2026 Assessment Year- 2018-19 3. The Ld. AR challenges the very impugned order on the sole issue that penalty order has been passed against a dead person. The Ld. AR submits that Krishnendu Barui (assessee) has died on 08.11.2023 and the intimation regarding his death has already been given to the department on 22.03.2024 by uploading the death certificate of the Krishnendu Barui even though penalty order passed by the AO on 13.03.2025 in the name of the deceased. The ld. AR filed death certificate of the Krishnendu Barui, screen short of the portal of the department in support of the contention that he has already informed regarding the death of the assessee

Contrary to that Ld. DR only submitted that CIT(A) dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine.

4.

On perusal of the documents filed by the assessee, we find that assessee Krishnendu Barui has died on 08.11.2023, the documents filed by the AR goes to establish that he has uploaded the death certificate on the portal of the Income Tax Department Ministry which is as follows:-

ITA No.1215/Kol/2026 Assessment Year- 2018-19

4.1. It is an undisputed fact that penalty order has been passed on 13.03.2025 against Krishnendu Barui. CIT(A) has also passed an order against the

ITA No.1215/Kol/2026 Assessment Year- 2018-19 Krishnendu Barui though the department was in the knowledge of death of the Krishnendu Barui.

Going over the discussion made above, we do not have any hesitation to hold that order passed u/s 27OA against a dead person is nullity.

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed. The penalty is hereby deleted.

Kolkata, the 14th August , 2026.

Sd/- Sd/-

[Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member

DC Dated:.14.08.2026.

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

ITA No.1215/Kol/2026 Assessment Year- 2018-19 //True copy// By order Deputy Registrar, Kolkata Benches

ITA No.1215/Kol/2026 Assessment Year- 2018-19

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →