VIJAY GARG,MEERUT vs. ITO WARD-1(2)(4), MEERUT

On hearing both the sides, we find that a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2021 in the name of Vijay Garg, the assessee, now represented by Shri Saurabh Agarwal, Legal Heir, who has filed the appeal. The case of assessee is that Shri Vijay Garg died on 10.10.2012, i.e., well before the issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. Consequently, the reassessment so framed in the name of the deceased Vijay Garg is vitiated and has to be considered as non est in law. Admittedly, the notice was issued in the name of the deceased only and not in the name of any legal heir. It comes up that when this reassessment order was challenged before the ld.CIT(A), the NFAC had merely examined the issue of late filing of the appeal.

On consideration of the impugned order, we find that the fact of death of the assessee was brought to the knowledge in the statement of facts filed in Form 35. However, the NFAC has considered the fact of deposit of cash in the bank post demise of the assessee and, thus, did not accept the plea of lack of knowledge of the LRs about the assessment proceedings. The ld. AR has submitted that Shri Vijay Garg had died and the business he was carrying on was run thereafter by some other persons to whom the business was assigned. However, the name of Vijay Garg continued to be the in the bank account.

In any case, on the basis of the aforesaid facts, it is submitted that the impugned notice and subsequent proceedings of reassessment were all in the name of the deceased person which vitiated the assumption of juri iction and 3

In the light of the aforesaid, the grounds are sustained. The appeal is allowed. The impugned orders are quashed. However, liberty rests with the AO to initiate appropriate proceedings afresh as per law in regard to any escapement of income to his knowledge.