LATE RAMCHANDRA WAMAN KHAMBETE ,MUMBAI vs. I.T.O -42(3)(2), MUMBAI

Briefly stated facts of the case are that Briefly stated facts of the case are that the return of income return of income was filed by the assessee on 18.06.2014 declarin was filed by the assessee on 18.06.2014 declaring total income at g total income at Rs.3,26,370/-. The return of income filed by the assessee was . The return of income filed by the assessee was . The return of income filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and statutory notices under the selected for scrutiny assessment and statutory notices under the selected for scrutiny assessment and statutory notices under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied with. In the assessment order passed u/s 143 with. In the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated (3) of the Act dated 30.12.2016, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.14,11,000/- 30.12.2016, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.14,11,000/ 30.12.2016, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.14,11,000/ as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and computed the tax as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and computed the tax as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and computed the tax liability under normal provisions of the Act. Subsequently, it was liability under normal provisions of the Act. Subsequently, it was liability under normal provisions of the Act. Subsequently, it was noticed that the addition u/s 68 of noticed that the addition u/s 68 of the Act should have been the Act should have been subjected to special rate of u/s 115BBE of the Act and therefore, subjected to special rate of u/s 115BBE of the Act and therefore, subjected to special rate of u/s 115BBE of the Act and therefore, after recording reason after recording reasons to believe that income escaped assessment, s to believe that income escaped assessment, a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 05.03.2019 was issued in the case notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 05.03.2019 was issued in the case notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 05.03.2019 was issued in the case of the assessee and subsequent of the assessee and subsequent notices u/s 142(1) were also notices u/s 142(1) were also issued. In response to issued. In response to notices, the legal heir of the assessee the legal heir of the assessee submitted that the assessee Shri Ramchandra Waman Khambete submitted that the assessee Shri Ramchandra Waman Khambete submitted that the assessee Shri Ramchandra Waman Khambete had passed away on 14.11.2018. Despite intimation by the legal had passed away on 14.11.2018. Despite intimation by the legal had passed away on 14.11.2018. Despite intimation by the legal heir regarding demise of the assessee, th heir regarding demise of the assessee, the Assessing Officer went e Assessing Officer went on to complete the assessment in the hands of the assessee after to complete the assessment in the hands of the assessee after to complete the assessment in the hands of the assessee after making addition of Rs.70.96,175/ making addition of Rs.70.96,175/-. The appeal filed by the legal . The appeal filed by the legal heir of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) was heir of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) was also dismissed. dismissed.

Before us, the Ld. counsel for the Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to the assessee referred to the additional ground challenging additional ground challenging the assessment order passed on order passed on deceased person. The Ld. counsel for the assessee has brought to deceased person. The Ld. counsel for the assessee has brought to deceased person. The Ld. counsel for the assessee has brought to our attention that not only notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on our attention that not only notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on our attention that not only notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on the deceased person the deceased person but the reassessment order has also been ment order has also been passed by the AO on AO on deceased person which is bad in law. The fact deceased person which is bad in law. The fact that the legal heir has also intimated to the Assessing Officer that the legal heir has also intimated to the Assessing Officer that the legal heir has also intimated to the Assessing Officer regarding death of the assessee and despite then Assessing Officer regarding death of the assessee and despite then Assessing Officer regarding death of the assessee and despite then Assessing Officer has passed the order has passed the order on non-existent person, which is invalid and person, which is invalid and bad-in-law. The AO was required to bring the legal heir of the law. The AO was required to bring the legal heir of the law. The AO was required to bring the legal heir of the assessee on record and accordingly the estate of deceased person assessee on record and accordingly the estate of deceased person assessee on record and accordingly the estate of deceased person should have been subject to reassessment through legal heir, but, should have been subject to reassessment through legal heir, but, should have been subject to reassessment through legal heir, but, the AO didn’t do the the AO didn’t do the same. Therefore, we quash the reassessment the reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee. proceedings in the case of the assessee. Thus, the present appeal he present appeal becomes infructuous. becomes infructuous.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.