BISWANATH SAHOO vs. Union of India AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WPO/1999/2022HC CalcuttaWBCHCO002820202220 April 2022Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the notice dated September 21, 2021, issued under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and all subsequent proceedings, including assessment and penalty, were invalid because they were initiated against a deceased person. The court acknowledged the settled legal position that no proceedings can be initiated against a dead person. The reasoning was based on the admitted factual position, supported by the death certificate, that the noticee had expired before the impugned notice was issued. The court quashed the impugned notice and all subsequent proceedings. However, it clarified that this would not prevent the respondent assessing officer from initiating any fresh proceedings in accordance with law. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Biswanath Sahoo, challenged a notice dated September 21, 2021, issued under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for assessment year 2010-11, along with all subsequent proceedings. The challenge was based on the ground that the proceedings were initiated against a deceased person. The noticee had expired on July 14, 2021, prior to the issuance of the impugned notice and subsequent orders. The petitioner provided a death certificate as evidence. The respondents' counsel could not contradict this fact and acknowledged the legal position that proceedings cannot be initiated against a dead person.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated September 21, 2021, issued under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and all subsequent proceedings, including assessment and penalty, are valid when initiated against a deceased person (mixed question of law and fact, concerning Section 142(1) and general principles of law). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the initiation of proceedings against a dead person is bad in law and unsustainable. The death certificate of the noticee, who expired on July 14, 2021, was submitted as proof. Revenue's Contention: The counsel for the respondents conceded that they could not contradict the factual position that the noticee was deceased and acknowledged the settled legal principle that proceedings cannot be initiated against a dead person.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

OD – 43

ORDER SHEET WPO 1999/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE

BISWANATH SAHOO Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN Date : 20th April, 2022.

APPEARANCE: Mr. Pranit Bag, Adv. Mr. Subhash Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Brijesh Kumar Singh, Adv. …for the petitioner

Mrs. Smita Das De, Adv. …for the respondnets

The Court : Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. In this matter, petitioner has challenged the impugned notice dated 21st September, 2021 under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to the assessment year 2010-11 and all subsequent proceedings including assessment order and penalty proceedings on the ground that the very initiation of the proceeding itself is bad and not sustainable in law for the reason that the same has been initiated against the dead person. It appears from record that the noticee has already expired on 14th July, 2021 and the impugned notice under Section 142(1) and all subsequent notices and orders were passed after the expiry of the noticee who has expired on 14th

July, 2021. Petitioner has annexed the death certificate of the noticee being Annexure P1 to the writ petition. Mrs. Smita Das De, learned Advocate appearing for the respondents is not in a position to contradict this admitted factual position substantiated by record that the noticee is a dead person and it is also the settled legal position that no proceedings can be initiated against a dead person. Considering the submissions of the parties, this writ petition being WPO No. 1999 of 2022 is disposed of by quashing the impugned notice dated 21st September, 2021 under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all subsequent proceedings including penalty proceeding. Quashing of the impugned proceeding will not prevent the respondent assessing officer to initiate any fresh proceeding in accordance with law.

(MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.)

Sbghosh

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →