MRS. PUSPALATHA MUNITHANAPPA KRISHNAPPA vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/10719/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01020473202428 August 2024Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR7 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the impugned assessment order dated 16.03.2024 and the demand notice dated 16.03.2024 were passed against a dead person, Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna. On this ground alone, the Court found the order to be non-est, nullity, and void ab initio. The Court reasoned that proceedings initiated or continued against a deceased person without proper substitution of legal representatives are invalid. Therefore, the impugned order and demand notice deserved to be set aside. The Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order and demand notice dated 16.03.2024, as well as the notice dated 31.03.2023 and order dated 31.03.2024. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer (R1) to the stage of the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act dated 14.03.2024 for fresh reconsideration. The petitioner undertook to appear on 13.09.2024, and liberty was granted to file additional pleadings. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mrs. Puspaltha Munithanappa Krishnappa, is the legal representative of her deceased husband, Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna. Proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) were initiated against the deceased for Assessment Year 2016-17. A notice under Section 148A(b) was issued to the deceased on 14.03.2023, followed by a reply and an order under Section 148A(d). Subsequently, a notice under Section 148 was issued on 31.03.2023. The deceased challenged these notices and orders in W.P.No.9725/2023. During the pendency of this writ petition, the deceased passed away on 08.11.2023. The writ petition was subsequently withdrawn. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer (R1) issued a show-cause notice under Section 147 on 01.03.2024 to the petitioner, who had not yet formally substituted herself as the legal representative. Consequently, an ex-parte assessment order and demand notice were issued on 16.03.2024, which are now under challenge.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order and demand notice issued under Section 147 and Section 156 respectively, for Assessment Year 2016-17, dated 16.03.2024, are liable to be quashed as being passed against a dead person. Assessee's contentions: The petitioner, as the legal representative of the deceased assessee, was entitled to continue the proceedings under Section 159 of the Act. The omission to formally substitute herself in the earlier writ petition (W.P.No.9725/2023) was due to bonafide reasons and unavoidable circumstances. The earlier proceedings had merit, and if quashed, the petitioner would contest the Section 148A(d) proceedings afresh. The impugned orders are nullities as they were passed against a deceased person. Revenue's contentions: The revenue argued that there is no merit in the writ petition and it is liable to be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148A,Section 156,Section 159

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:34451 WP No. 10719 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 10719 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

MRS. PUSPALATHA MUNITHANAPPA KRISHNAPPA W/O. LATE NARAYANASWAMY PERUMANNA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, NO. 987, HAL 2ND STAGE, 12TH MAIN, 1ST CROSS, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 008, PAN NO. GFXPP48664 …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VANAJA M.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WARD (1) (2) (1), BANGALORE, KORAMANGALA KHB GAMES VILLAGE, BANGALORE-560 095.

2.

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 6TH BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 095.

3.

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, DELHI-110 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAX POLICY & LEGISLATION DIVISION. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE FOR R1)

Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:34451 WP No. 10719 of 2024

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE ORDER BEARING NO. ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1062737730(1), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17, UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT DATED 16/03/2024 ISSUED BY THE R1 (ANNEXURE-B) AND THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED U/S 156 OF THE IT ACT DATED 16/03/2024 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2016-17 UNDER REF. NO. ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1062737867 BY THE R1 (ANNEXURE-C).OR B) DIRECTING THE R1 TO WITHDRAW THE ASST. ORDER BEARING NO. ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1062737730(1), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17, ISSUED UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT DATED 16/03/2024 (ANNEXURE-B) AND THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED U/S 156 OF THE IT ACT DATED 16/03/2024 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2016-17 UNDER REF. NO. ITBA/AST/S/156/23- 24/1062737867(1) BY THE R1 (ANNEXURE-C).

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “a) Issue a writ of certiorari or a direction or order in the nature of certiorari quashing the order bearing No. ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1062737730(1), for the Assessment year 2016-17, under Section 147 of the Act dated 16/03/2024 issued by the 1st Respondent (Annexure-B) and the Demand Notice issued U/S 156 of the I.T.Act dated 16/03/2024 for the Asst. year 2016-17 under ref. No. ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1062737867 by the 1st Respondent (Annexure-C). OR b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or a direction or order in the nature of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to withdraw the Asst order bearing No.

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:34451 WP No. 10719 of 2024

ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1062737730(1), for the Assessment year 2016-17, issued under section 147 of the Act dated 16/03/2024 (Annexure-B) and the demand notice issued u/s 156 of the I.T.ACT dated 16/03/2024 for the Asst. year 2016-17 under ref. No. ITBA/AST/S/156/23- 24/1062737867(1) by the 1st Respondent (Annexure-C). OR c) Issue any other Direction or order in the as this Hon’ble High Court deem fit in the circumstances of the case. AND d) Allow the Writ petition with cost.”

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.

3.

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the wife of Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna, who expired on 08.11.2023. During his lifetime, notice dated 14.03.2023 passed under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1960 (for short “the I.T. Act”) was issued to the aforesaid Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna. He filed a reply dated 20.03.2023 along with the documents, pursuant to which an order under Section 148A(d) of the I.T. Act was passed by respondent No.1, which was followed by a notice under Section 148 of the I.T. Act dated 31.03.2023 to the said Late

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC:34451 WP No. 10719 of 2024

Narayanaswamy Perumanna. The aforesaid Narayanaswamy Perumanna challenged the aforesaid notice and order in W.P.No.9725/2023, during the pendency of which he expired and the said petition stood disposed of as withdrawn. In view of disposal of W.P.No.9725/2023, respondent No.1 issued a show- cause notice under Section 147 of the I.T. Act dated 01.03.2024, which was not responded by the petitioner, who is the wife and legal representative of the original assessee, Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna and issued notice to the petitioner as well as other legal representatives of original assessee, Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna and exparte order dated 16.03.2024 and impugned demand notice dated 16.03.2024 were passed/issued by the respondents, which is assailed in the present petition.

4.

In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the demise of petitioner’s husband on 08.11.2023, the petitioner being his wife and legal representative was entitled to come on record and continue the proceedings by virtue of Section 159 of the I.T. Act and due to oversight and inadvertence, the petitioner herein did not do so and W.P.No.9725/2023 was disposed of as withdrawn. It is submitted that omission on the part of the petitioner to take necessary steps

- 5 -

NC: 2024:KHC:34451 WP No. 10719 of 2024

to come on record as a legal representative of her husband, Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna and omission to continue the said proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, sufficient cause and unavoidable circumstances. It is also submitted that the said Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna had a good case to urge on merits and in W.P.No.9725/2023, which assailed the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax and consequently, if the same is set aside along with all subsequent orders and notices, the petitioner would contest the proceedings under Section 148A(d) proceedings in accordance with law.

5.

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6.

A perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-B dated 16.03.2024 as well as the demand notice at Annexure-C dated 16.03.2024 will indicate that the same has been passed against a dead person i.e., in the name of Late Narayanaswamy Perumanna, on this ground alone the impugned order passed against a dead person is non-est, nullity and void ab initio and deserves to be set

- 6 -

NC: 2024:KHC:34451 WP No. 10719 of 2024

aside and the matter be remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

7.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i. The Writ Petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned order at Annexure-B dated 16.03.2024, the impugned demand notice at Annexure-C dated 16.03.2024, the impugned notice dated 31.03.2023 at Annexure-G and the impugned order at Annexure-F dated 31.03.2024 are hereby quashed. iii. The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 to the stage of notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the I.T. Act, dated 14.03.2024 for reconsideration afresh of the matter and proceed further, in accordance with law. iv. Petitioner undertakes to appear before respondent No.1 on 13.09.2024 without awaiting further notice. v. Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, documents etc., before respondent No.1, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law.

- 7 -

NC: 2024:KHC:34451 WP No. 10719 of 2024

vi. Respondent No.1 is directed to provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law.

Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →