SOMESHWAR PUSATKAR(L/H REVAN PUSATKAR,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 38/NAG/2022Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 October 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that a notice cannot be issued in the name of a dead person, rendering the notice and the subsequent order void-ab-initio. Therefore, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee were allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee passed away on August 2, 2020. Subsequently, a notice under section 263 of the Income Tax Act was issued on December 17, 2021, in the name of the deceased assessee. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax passed an order under section 263 on January 18, 2022, also in the name of the deceased.

What were the issues?

Whether a notice issued under section 263 of the Income Tax Act to a deceased person is legally valid and whether the consequent order is void-ab-initio.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH : : NAGPUR

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri K.P.Dewani – AR
For Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya – Sr.DR
Hearing: 26/10/2023Pronounced: 30/10/2023

आदेश/ ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This appeal is filed against the order of ld.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur-1, dated 18.01.2021 under section 263 of the Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :

Someshwar Pusatkar (L/H Revan Pusatkar) [A]

1) Notice issued u/s 263 on 17/12/2021 is illegal, invalid and bad in law. Thus consequent order passed u/s 263 of I.T. Act 1961 on 18/01/2022 is liable to be cancelled.

2) The learned PCIT erred in holding that the order passed in the case of assessee u/s 143(3) of I.T. Act 1961 on 10/12/2019 by Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Amravati is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and setting aside the same u/s 263 of I.T. Act 1961.

3) The learned PCIT erred in holding that creditworthiness of lenders of unsecured loans has not been verified and so also purpose of cash withdrawal at Rs.50 lacs has not been examined even though above aspects were duly examined by A.O. while accepting the income declared in return in assessment framed u/s 143(3) of I.T. Act 1961.

4) The order passed by A.O. on 10/12/2019 u/s 143(3) is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue and ought not to have been set aside by PCIT u/s 263 of I.T. Act 1961.

5) The order passed by PCIT, Nagpur u/s 263 of I.T. Act 1961 in the name of Someshwar Vitthalrao Pusatkar (dead person) is illegal.

6) The order passed by PCIT Nagpur u/s 263 of I.T. Act 1961 is without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard and is in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and thus is bad in law.

7) Any other ground shall be prayed at the time of hearing.

Submission of ld.AR : 2 The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee submitted that Assessee expired on 02.08.2020. The notice under section 263 of the Act was issued in the name of assessee on Someshwar Pusatkar (L/H Revan Pusatkar) [A] 17.12.2021 i.e. after the Death of assessee. The ld.AR pleaded that therefore, order under section 263 is void-ab-initio.

3.

The ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) relied on the order of the ld.CIT(A).

Findings & Analysis : 4. Assessee has filed a paper book in which assessee has filed copy of order under section 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act, dated 29.03.2023. In the said order, it is specifically mentioned that assessee expired on 02.08.2020. It is also mentioned in the said order that the legal heir claimed that he registered himself as legal heir on the Income Tax Portal on 09.02.2021 and also filed Return of Income for A.Y.2020-21 as legal heir on 15.02.2021.

5.

However, the ld.Pr.CIT had issued notice under section 263 of the Act on 17.12.2021 in the name of assessee. The order under section 263 of the Act is also in the name of “Someshwar Vithalrao Pusatkar” i.e. the assessee, who expired in 2020.

5.1 No notice can be issued in the name of a dead person, therefore, notice under section 263 dated 17.12.2021 is bad in law. Hence, order under section 263 dated 18.01.2022 is void-ab-initio. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.

Someshwar Pusatkar (L/H Revan Pusatkar) [A]

6.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th October, 2023.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →