SRI LATE CHEMMANUR DEVASSY GEORGE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/10570/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01023883202623 June 2026Author: B M SHYAM PRASAD6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the proceedings initiated against the assessee after his demise on 15.07.2024, with the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act on 24.06.2025, were undisputed and crucial. It is settled law that proceedings initiated against a person after their demise are void ab initio, unlike cases where the assessee dies after the proceedings have commenced. The Court noted that the petitioner did not dispute that the Revenue would still be open to initiate proceedings under law. Therefore, the petition was allowed, and the impugned Assessment Order and Penalty Notice were quashed. However, this was without prejudice to the Revenue's right to initiate proceedings against the legal representatives of the deceased assessee under law.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, as the legal heir of the deceased assessee, Sri Late Chemmanur Devassy George, challenged an Assessment Order dated 28.02.2026 passed under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a consequential Penalty Notice dated 28.02.2026. Both were for the assessment year 2024-25. The assessee passed away on 15.07.2024. The petitioner contended that assessment proceedings were initiated only on 24.06.2025 with a notice under Section 143(2), which was after the assessee's death. The Revenue argued that the legal representatives filed returns on 11.11.2024 in the deceased's name without disclosing the death or their details, and thus could not object to the assessment orders.

What were the issues?

1. Whether assessment proceedings initiated against a deceased assessee after their date of death are void ab initio, turning on Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Whether a penalty notice issued consequent to such void assessment proceedings is also liable to be quashed. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment proceedings, initiated by a notice under Section 143(2) on 24.06.2025, were commenced after the assessee's death on 15.07.2024, rendering them void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment order and penalty notice should be quashed. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the legal representatives filed the Income Tax Returns on 11.11.2024 in the name of the deceased assessee without disclosing the death or their own details. Therefore, the petitioner, as a legal representative, could not take exception to the assessment orders.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 143(2),Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10570 OF 2026 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

SRI LATE CHEMMANUR DEVASSY GEORGE 49 YEARS NO.1, CHEMMANUR ENCLAVE, BASAVANAGAR, MARATHAHALLI BANGALORE-560037 REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIR AND SON, SRI ANOOP CHEMMANUR, CHEMMANUR ENCLAVE, MARATHAHALLI POST, MARATHAHALLI, BANGALORE-560037.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S V., ADVOCATE) AND:

1.

INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE 4(1)(1), BANGALORE 560095

2.

NATIONAL FACELESS

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

ASSESSMENT CENTRE, ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI 110003.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.E.I. SANMATHI., ADVOCATE A/W SRI. NIRMAL MATHEW., ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) QUASHING THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S 144B OF THE ACT, DATED 28/02/2026 BEARING DIN NO. RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2024-25 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A; II) QUASHING THE NOTICE OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271AAC(1) OF THE ACT, DATED 28/02/2026 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/S/271AAC(1)/2025- 26/1086697656(1), ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2024-25 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE - A1.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner asserts that he is the legal representative and heir of Late Chemmanur Devassy George, and the petitioner has impugned the Assessment Order dated 28.02.2026 under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, 'the IT Act']. The petitioner has also impugned the consequential Penalty Notice dated 28.02.2026. The impugned Assessment Order and the Penalty Notice are for the assessment year 2024-25, and these are produced as Annexures-A and A1.

2.

The petitioner seeks intervention with the Assessment Order and the Penalty Notice on a short question viz., whether the proceedings for assessment

could have been begun after 15.07.2024 - the date of death of the assessee [Sri Chemmanur Devassy George]. The petitioner asserts that the proceedings are begun only on 24.06.2025 with the notice under Section 143(2) of the IT Act. Sri S.V. Ravi Shankar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, relies upon these circumstances to contend that this Court must quash the impugned Assessment Order and the Penalty Notice.

3.

Sri. E. I. Sanmathi, a learned standing counsel who accepts notice for the respondents, is heard for the final disposal of the petition. The learned Standing Counsel, relying upon the Returns of Income Tax filed on 11.11.2024, submits that the legal representatives have filed Returns in the name of the deceased assessee without disclosing the demise or the details of the representatives in terms of the prescribed form. The learned standing counsel argues that if the legal representatives have filed Returns

without disclosing either the death of the assessee or the details of the representatives, the petitioner [a legal representative] cannot take exception with the assessment orders.

4.

This Court must observe that the proceedings initiated against the assessee after his demise on 15.07.2024 with the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act on 24.06.2025 remains undisputed. This would be crucial and determinative because it is settled that the proceedings initiated against a person after his demise will be void ab initio unlike a case where the assessee dies after the initiation of the proceedings. As regards the terms upon which there must be interference with the impugned Assessment Order and the Penalty Notice, this Court must record that when queried Sri S.V. Ravi Shankar does not dispute that the limitation would still be open to the Revenue to begin proceedings under law. In the light of the afore, the following.

ORDER The petition is allowed, and the impugned Assessment Order dated 28.02.2026 [Annexure-A] and Notice of Penalty dated 28.02.2026 [Annexure-A1] are quashed but without prejudice to the Revenue to begin proceedings against the legal representatives of the deceased assessee under law.

Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

SA Ct:sr

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →