PIYUSH GOENKA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO 44(2) AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WPA/1702/2022HC CalcuttaWBCHCA003707202210 February 2022Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the notice dated June 30, 2021, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was null and void as it was issued against a dead person. The court considered the death certificate and the fact that the revenue had been informed of the death prior to the issuance of the notice. The court's reasoning was based on the principle that legal proceedings, including the issuance of statutory notices, cannot be initiated against a person who is no longer alive. The ratio decidendi is that a notice under Section 148, when issued against a deceased individual, is a nullity. Consequently, the impugned notice was quashed. However, the court clarified that this quashing would not preclude the revenue from initiating fresh proceedings if legally permissible.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mr. Piyush Goenka, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated June 30, 2021, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner contended that the notice was issued against a deceased person, rendering it null and void. A death certificate, showing the noticee's death on July 31, 2019, was presented. This fact, the petitioner argued, was already communicated to the respondents on December 22, 2020. The revenue, represented by Mr. Tilak Mitra, was unable to contradict these submissions, which were supported by the records.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against a deceased person is null and void? (Question of law) The petitioner argued that the notice under Section 148 was invalid because it was issued after the death of the assessee. The petitioner relied on the death certificate and the prior intimation of death to the revenue. The revenue did not present any counter-arguments or rely on any specific provisions or precedents to support the validity of the notice in this context.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

10-02-2022 Item No.40 Subrata IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA No.1702 of 2022 Mr. Piyush Goenka -vs- The Income Tax Officer, Ward No.44(2) & Ors. Mr. Avra Mazumder Mr. K. Roy …for the petitioner Mr. Tilak Mitra …for the revenue Affidavit of service filed in court be taken on record. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned notice dated June 30, 2021 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the grounds that the impugned notice has been issued against a dead person which, on the face of it, is null and void. Mr Mazumder, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, in support of his contention has relied on the death certificate of the noticee as appears on page 19 of the writ petition from which it appears that the date of death of the noticee is July 31, 2019 and this fact was already intimated to the respondents on December 22, 2020 as appears from page 23 of the writ petition. Mr Mitra, learned advocate appearing for the revenue, is not in a position to contradict these allegations which are substantiated by record. Considering the facts of the case and submission of the parties, this writ petition being WPA No.1702 of 2022 is disposed of by quashing the aforesaid impugned notice

2 dated June 30, 2021 under section 148 of the Act. However, quashing of the impugned notice will not prevent the respondents concerned from initiating any fresh proceeding, if law permits. [Md. Nizamuddin, J]

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →