LATE SH. BANSHI LAL MELANA THROUGH L/H SH. GOPAL LAL MELANA,BHILWARA vs. ITO, WARD-1, BHILWARA, BHILWARA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 886 and 887/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year 2013-14 and 2014-15) Late Shri Banshi Lal Melana ITO, Ward-1, Bhilwara through L/H Sh. Gopal Lal Melana Kalani and Co. LLP, Chartered Accountants, 5th floor, Milestone Building, Gandhinagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302015 PAN No. AEBPM7010F Assessee by Shri P.C. Parwal, CA (Virtually) Revenue by Smt. Ayushi Sharma, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing 06 / 05 / 2026 Date of Pronouncement 13 / 05 / 2026 ORDER DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, A.M.: These appeals are filed against the separate order of the Commissioner Income Tax Appeal, ADDL/JCIT (A), Madurai [hereinafter referred to as the JCIT(A)] dated 26.08.2025 and 29.08.2025 with respect to assessment year 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively, challenging therein validity of the assessment order as being passed in the name of deceased person. 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR has submitted that the appellant assessee was expired on 12.01.2014. He explained that inspite knowing the fact,

2 ITA No. 886 and 887/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year 2013-14 and 2014-15) the AO has issued all the notices and passed the assessment order in the name of the deceased person (assessee). He explained that the Ld. JCIT(A) has stated that notice under Section 148 was issued by the AO to the legal heir Shri Gopal Lal Melana on 29.09.2016 and served on him on 30.09.2016, whereas, the facts on record is that notice under Section 148 dated 29.09.2016 (APB page No. 21) was received in the name of Banshi Lal Melana and not in the name of Gopal Lal Melana as legal heir of Banshi Lal Melana. The Ld. AR argued that the AO has mentioned in the assessment order that the notice was served on the legal heir Shri Gopal Lal Melana, that would not make the notice valid in the eyes of law, even if the legal heir had participated in the assessment proceedings. In fact, the notice was acknowledged by the Gopal Lal Melana on 30.09.2016 but even after acknowledging the fact of the death of the assessee, no fresh notice was issued and therefore, the entire proceedings and assessment passed in the name of deceased person is illegal and bad in law. He placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs. Bhupendra Bhikhalal Desai (2021) 283 Taxman 376. He further placed reliance on the Hon’ble Supreme Court, where SLP filed by the revenue was dismissed against the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court reported in 200 DTR 313

3 ITA No. 886 and 887/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year 2013-14 and 2014-15) where the notice under Section 148 against the dead person is held unenforceable in law and in such case revenue cannot contend that they have no knowledge of the death of the assessee, they are entitled to plead that notice is not defective. In the present case, both the lower authorities have knowledge about the death of the assessee but still they passed the order in the name of deceased assessee so the order passed is illegal and bad in law. 3. Per contra the Ld. DR for the department relied on the impugned order. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the material on record and the impugned order. Admittedly, the AO has issued notice in the name of the deceased assessee and also passed assessment order in the name of deceased. The Ld. JCIT(A) has also passed the order in the name of the deceased assessee inspite of the fact that both the lower authorities have knowledge about the death of the assessee. It is well settled law that any order passed by any judicial or quasi-judicial authority in the name of deceased person renders the entire assessment proceeding or the appellate proceedings as illegal and bad in law. 5. Following the Hon’ble Apex Court’s judgment in the case of ITO Vs. Bhupendra Bhikhalal Desai (Supra), we hold that notice issued in the

4 ITA No. 886 and 887/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year 2013-14 and 2014-15) name of the dead person would be a nullity and the assessment order passed on the dead persons would held as illegal and bad in law. Without prejudice to the above, it is worthy mentioned here that the issuance of a notice to a dead person is not a technical defect to be curable under Section 292BB of the Act. 6. We, therefore, hold that the issuance of the notice to a dead person and the consequent assessment order thereto would be held without jurisdiction and therefore, the assessment order passed by the AO in ITA No. 886 and 887/Jodh/2025 would liable to be quashed as void-ab- initio. Accordingly, the assessment order passed in the name of the dead person in both the appeals in ITA No. 886 and 887/Jodh/2025 are held illegal, bad in law. Therefore, the assessment orders passed with respect to the assessment year 2013-14 and 2014-15 are quashed. 7. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced on 13 / 05 / 2026 in the open court.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUDHIR PAREEK) (DR. MITHA LAL MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 13 / 05 / 2026. Pritesh Vaishnav PS

5 ITA No. 886 and 887/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year 2013-14 and 2014-15) True Copy Copies to : (1) The appellant. (2) The respondent. (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File

BY ORDER,