Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeal was filed by the legal heir of the deceased assessee for assessment year 2017-18. The assessee had expired on 05/03/2017, but the notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 23/09/2018. The assessment order was passed against the deceased person.
Held
The Tribunal held that an assessment cannot be made against a deceased person as the definition of 'person' under Section 2(31) of the Income Tax Act implies a living individual. Therefore, the assessment made on the deceased was illegal and void ab initio.
Key Issues
Whether an assessment order passed against a deceased person is valid in law, especially when the proceedings were initiated after the assessee's death.
Sections Cited
143(3), 143(2), 2(7), 2(31)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
Vikram Punvani for assessment year 2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated 07/09/2022 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1045271470(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:
“1. The order has been passed against the dead person which is illegal and no assessment can be made against the dead person. The fact was known to both the learned Assessing
Officer and CIT(A) but the same has been ignored while passing the order.
The learned Assessing Officer had not appreciated the facts of the case in reference to the amount of Rs.16,20,000/- deposited in the bank account and passed the order without application of mind. Even the learned CIT(A).”
(B) At the very outset Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment order has been made in favour of the deceased. Not only this, the proceeding u/s 143(3) has been initiated against the deceased. The assessee expired on 05/03/2017 while the notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 23/09/2018 therefore, it was contended that the assessment has been made on the deceased person and therefore this is in nullity.
(C) On the other hand Learned D. R. supported the orders of the authorities below.
(D) I have heard the rival submissions, carefully considered the same along with the orders of the tax authorities below. I noted that the term assessee has been defined under section 2 sub section (7) to mean a person by whom any tax or any sum payable under this Act and includes -
(a) every person in respect of whom any proceeding under this Act has been taken for the assessment of his income or assessment of fringe benefits or of the income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable or of the loss sustained by him or by such other person, or of the amount of refund due to him or to such other person ; (b) every person who is deemed to be an assessee under any provision of this Act ; (c) every person who is deemed to be an assessee in default under any provision of this Act ; (D.1) From the said provision, it is apparent that for being an assessee there must be a person. The person has been defined under section 2 sub section (31) of the Act as under:
(31) “person” includes— (i) an individual, (ii) a Hindu undivided family, (iii) a company, (iv) a firm, (v) an association of persons or a body of individuals, whether incorporated or not, (vi) a local authority, and (vii) every artificial juridical person, not falling within any of the preceding sub-clauses. Explanation- For the purposes of this clause, an association of persons or a body of individuals or a local authority or an artificial juridical person shall be deemed to be a person, whether or not such person or body or authority or juridical person was formed or established or incorporated with the object of deriving income, profits or gains ; (E) In the instant case, I noted that the Assessing Officer has assessed the assessee in the status of an individual. An individual can only be a human being. The person who is not in existence, cannot be regarded to be an individual. Since he cannot be an individual therefore, he cannot be regarded to be a person u/s 2 sub section (31) of the Act and consequently, he cannot be an assessee. Since there cannot be an assessment on a deceased person therefore, I do agree with Learned counsel for the assessee that the assessment made by the Assessing Officer is illegal and void ab initio. My aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Amarchand N. Shroff [1963] 48 ITR 59 (SC) and Income Tax Officer vs. Durlabhbhai Kanubhai Rajpura [2020] 114 taxmann.com 482 (SC). This view is further in conformity with order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, which is the jurisdictional High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Suresh Chandra Jaiswal 325 ITR 563 (Allahabad). Moreover, in the case of ACIT vs. Fakhruddin Taiyebali Padaria [2025] 171 taxmann.com 93 (Mumbai-Trib.), it was held by Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal that once an assessee is dead, no valid assessment or reassessment can be made in the name of the deceased. In view of the foregoing discussion and respectfully following the aforesaid precedents, I quash the assessment.
(F) Since I have already quashed the assessment therefore, the other grounds taken by the assessee do not require any adjudication.
(G) In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 12/06/2025)