MOHHAMAD SHAFIQUE MOHAMMAD ISMAIL MALNAS THROUGH LEGAL HEIR MHD JUBAIR MHD SHAIFIQUE MALNAS,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-1, YAVATMAL., YAVATMAL

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is illegal, bad in law and liable to be quashed.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the notice issued under section 148 dated 30.03.2024 was issued in the name of a deceased person who had expired on 14.12.2019, and therefore the entire reassessment proceedings are void ab initio and without jurisdiction.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in law in not holding that issuance of notice in the name of a deceased person is a jurisdictional defect which cannot be cured under section 292B or section 292BB of the Act.

The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer erred in not bringing the legal heir of the deceased assessee on record before initiating or completing the reassessment proceedings, thereby violating the mandatory provisions of section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the entire reassessment proceedings are void ab initio since the very assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 is invalid in law.