VINODBHAI SHAMJIBHAI SAGPARIYA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2 (1)(1) RKT

PDF · subscribers
SCA/23112/2022HC GujaratGJHC24074794202221 December 2022Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI,HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the notices and orders issued by the respondent authority to the deceased assessee, after the department had been duly informed of the death and had approved the petitioner as the legal heir, were void ab initio. The court reasoned that once the department acknowledged the death and the substitution of the legal heir, continuing to issue notices to the deceased was procedurally invalid and violated principles of natural justice. The court relied on its own decision in Kanubhai Jinabhai Patel and the Delhi High Court's decision in Savita Kapila. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the assessment order dated March 22, 2022, for Assessment Year 2013-14, along with all consequential notices, was quashed and set aside. The court did not leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vinodbhai Shamjibhai Sagpariya, filed a Special Civil Application challenging notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2 (1)(1) RKT. The core issue is that the notices were issued to the petitioner's deceased father, who passed away on August 20, 2017. The petitioner had communicated this fact to the department on March 29, 2019, and his request to be recognized as the legal heir with a specific PAN was allowed on March 30, 2019. Despite this, the department continued to issue notices to the deceased. The petition sought to quash these notices and orders, and stay further recovery proceedings for Assessment Year 2013-14. An interim order directed that the assessment process could continue with the petitioner's cooperation, but no final order was to be passed before the returnable date.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices and orders issued by the respondent authority to a deceased assessee, after the department was duly informed of the death and the legal heir was recognized, are void ab initio? (Question of law turning on principles of natural justice and procedural validity). The assessee argued that since the department was aware of the death of the assessee (the petitioner's father) on August 20, 2017, and had acknowledged the petitioner as the legal heir on March 30, 2019, any subsequent notices issued to the deceased were void ab initio. The assessee relied on the decisions in Kanubhai Jinabhai Patel vs. Income-tax Officer and Savita Kapila vs. Assistant Commissioner. The revenue, represented by learned senior standing counsel, did not dispute the fact that the department had been communicated the death well in time and had approved the request of the petitioner as the legal heir.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/SCA/23112/2022 ORDER DATED: 21/12/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 23112 of 2022 ========================================================== VINODBHAI SHAMJIBHAI SAGPARIYA Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2 (1)(1) RKT ========================================================== Appearance: MR FENIL H MEHTA(11663) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR NIKUNT RAVAL(1046) ASSISTED BY MR KARAN SHANGANI for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI and HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT Date : 21/12/2022 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) 1. The action of the respondent since has aggrieved the petitioner, it has approached this Court by way of the present petition where this Court while issuing the notice on 22.11.2022 passed the following order: “1. Present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs: “(a) quash and set aside the impugned notices and orders at Annexure- 'A', 'B1’, ‘B2;’, 'C', 'D1’, ‘D2’, ‘D3’, ‘D4’, ‘D5’', ‘D6’ to this Petition; (b) pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, to stay implementation Page 1 of 5

C/SCA/23112/2022 ORDER DATED: 21/12/2022 and operation of the orders at Annexure C to this petition and stay further proceedings of recovery for A.Y. 2013-14; (c) any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted in the interest of justice; (d) to provide for the cost of this petition.” 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the notice is issued to the deceased, who passed away on 20.08.2017. 3. Notice for final disposal, returnable on 13.12.2022. 4. By way of interim relief, it is directed that the process of assessment shall continue with the cooperation of the petitioner, however, the final assessment order shall not be passed before the returnable date. 5. Over and above the regular mode of service, service of notice through e-mode on the official e-mail ID is permitted.” 2. We have heard the learned advocate, Mr.Fenil Mehta for the petitioner, who has drawn the attention of this Court that the death of the father of the petitioner had Page 2 of 5

C/SCA/23112/2022 ORDER DATED: 21/12/2022 been communicated to the department on 29.03.2019, the death had occurred on 20.08.2017. It was a request to allow him to be a legal heir with PAN No.AELPP3476J. The said request had also been allowed on 30.03.2019 and yet the authority concerned had continued to issue the notice upon the death person. 2.1 He has also relied on the decision of this Court in case of Kanubhai Jinabhai Patel vs. Income-tax Officer, reported in [2022] 139 taxmann.com 580 (Guj.) and also on the decision of the Delhi High Court in case of Savita Kapila vs. Assistant Commissioner, reported in [2020] 118 taxmann.com 46 (Delhi). 3. Learned senior standing counsel, Page 3 of 5

C/SCA/23112/2022 ORDER DATED: 21/12/2022 Mr.Raval assisted by the learned advocate, Mr.Karan Sanghani does not dispute the fact of the department having been communicated this well in time on 29.03.2019 and granted its approval of 30.03.2019. 4. The show cause notice has been issued on 10.03.2022 and the father of petitioner (since deceased) had passed away on 20.08.2017, the intimation had already been sent on 29.03.2019 and therefore, any notice subsequent thereto after the respondent had acknowledged the same and had approved the request on 30.03.2019 is void ab initio and hence, the petition deserves to be allowed. 5. We notice that two notices under Sections 148 and 142(1) of the IT Act and the final show cause notices for the Page 4 of 5

C/SCA/23112/2022 ORDER DATED: 21/12/2022 assessment year 2012-13 had been issued, which all culminated into the passing of an assessment order, which is impugned in the present petition. 6. Resultantly, this petition is allowed quashing and setting aside the order of assessment dated 22.03.2022 for the assessment

year

2013-14

and

all consequential notices. 7. Over and above the regular mode of service, direct service through e-mode on official email address is also permitted. (SONIA GOKANI, J) (MAUNA M. BHATT,J) M.M.MIRZA Page 5 of 5

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →