MOHAMMAD SHARIF SIDDIQUI (THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SUHAIL SIDDIQUI),MUMBAI-400008 vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-20(2)(1), MUMBAI-400012

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1179/MUM/2022Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 December 2022AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that both the assessment order and the revisionary order passed under Section 263 were invalid because they were issued in the name of a deceased person. Notices issued to a deceased individual are considered invalid and cannot be validly served.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income, and during assessment proceedings, it was discovered that the assessee had passed away. Despite this, the Assessing Officer passed an assessment order in the name of the deceased assessee. Subsequently, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) passed a revisionary order under Section 263, also in the name of the deceased.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of assessment and revisionary orders passed in the name of a deceased assessee. The secondary issue was whether the PCIT's direction to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 271AAC was valid under these circumstances.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 271AAC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri. Sanjeev
Hearing: 11.10.2022
1.

This appeal is filed by Mr. Suhail Siddiqui in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) in the name of Late Mr. Mohammad Sharif Siddique for A.Y. 2017-18 on 29th March, 2022 wherein the learned PCIT held that assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 17th December, 2019 determining the total income

5.

The legal heir of the assessee is aggrieved with the above order and filed this appeal. The first ground raised

is that the 263 order is invalid as same is passed in the name of deceased person. It was also stated that assessment order is also passed in the name of dead person.

06. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, this appeal is decided on the basis of information available on record.

7.

The learned CIT Departmental Representative supported the order of the order of the learned PCIT.

8.

We have carefully considered the contentions of the learned CIT Departmental Representative and also perused the orders of the lower authorities. In the assessment order itself, the learned Assessing Officer has mentioned that he has come to know through e-portal that assessee has expired in the month of January, 2019. Despite this fact, the assessment order was passed in the name of late Mr. Mohammad Sharif Siddique on 17th December, 2019. This order was revised by the learned PCIT on 29th March, 2022 by an order passed under Section 263 of the Act. This order was also passed in the

9.

In view of this, we have no hesitation in quashing the order passed under Section 263 of the Act. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

10.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.12.2022.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →