TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... instant case. Consequently, the present reassessment proceedings initiated by issuance notice on the deceased assessee are being quashed for want of jurisdiction. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 989/JP/2015 - - - Dated:- 26-11-2019 - Shri Vijay Pal Rao, JM And Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, AM For the Assessee : Shri Mahendra Garyieya And Shri Rohit Tiwari (Adv.) For the Revenue : Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT) And Shri Laxman Singh (AO) ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 18.09.2015 for the assessment year 2006-07 wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The very action taken u/s 147 r/w 148 is bad in law without jurisdiction and being void ab-initio, the same kindly be quashed. Consequently the impugned assessment framed u/s 144/148 dated 11.02.2014 also kindly be quashed. 2. The impugned additions and disallowances made in the order u/s 147/144 of the Act dated 11.02.2014 are bad in law and on facts of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issuance of valid notice is a foundation for the valid re-assessment proceedings. The notice prescribed u/s 148 is not a mere procedural requirement, but is a condition precedent to the validity of reassessment proceedings. If no notice is issued or if the notice issues is shown to be invalid, the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer would be invalid and void. In the instant case, it was submitted that the proceedings u/s 147 were initiated against the dead person who had expired on 26.11.2008 i.e. much prior to the issuance of notice u/s 148 on 20.03.2013. It was submitted that the impugned notice having been issued in the name of a dead person was an invalid notice and consequently such proceedings are void ab initio. It was further submitted that the AO did not issue any notice u/s 148 of the Act or 143(2) of the Act in the name of the legal heirs. Therefore, the assessment framed by the AO on the basis of the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act in the name of the deceased assessee was invalid and void ab initio. 5. Another contention raised by the ld. AR was that impugned notice u/s 148 dated 20.03.2013 was never served on the deceased ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ascertain the existence of status of the assessee. Therefore, the notice u/s 148 was rightly issued in time and proceedings were as per law, as mentioned by the AO in his assessment order. He accordingly supported the findings of the AO and the ld CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The undisputed facts are that the assessee, Shri Bhura Ram had expired on 26.11.2008 as per death certificate dated 11.02.2009 issued by Jaipur Municipal Corporation. The reasons for reopening the assessment u/s 147 were recorded on 15.03.2013 and thereafter the notice u/s 148 was issued in the name of assessee on 20.03.2013. Therefore, at the time of issuance of the notice u/s 148, the assessee had already expired and the notice was thus issued in the name of deceased assessee. Further, we find that there is no subsequent notice u/s 148 which has been issued by the Assessing Officer on the legal heirs of the deceased assessee. In this regard, we refer to the decision of Delhi High Court in case of Vipin Walia vs. ITO (supra) wherein referring to the provisions of section 159 of the Act, it was held as under: 11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 148 of the Act issued in the name of the dead person - the said Mr.S.Veerappan is enforceable in law and the subsidiary issue being as to whether the petitioner, being the wife of the said Mr.S.Veerappan, can be compelled to participate in the proceedings and respond to the impugned notice. The fact that the said Mr.S.Veerappan died on 26.1.2010 is not in dispute. If this fact is not disputed, then the notice issued in the name of the dead person is unenforceable in the eye of law. 15. The Department seeks to justify their stand by contending that they were not intimated about the death of the assessee, that the legal heirs did not take any steps to cancel the PAN registration in the name of the assessee and that therefore, the Department was justified in directing the petitioner to co-operate in the proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice. 16. The settled legal principle being that a notice issued in the name of the dead person is unenforceable in law. If such is the legal position, would the Revenue be justified in contending that they, having no knowledge about the death of the assessee, are entitled to plead that the notice is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
