9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred in considering the facts of the case and in ignoring that while uploading order in assessment module of ITBA application of Income Tax Department, the system automatically fetches the name of the assessee as per PAN Database. Hence, the name of the deceased assessee appeared on the assessment order. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the facts that there is no dispute that any proceedings which could have been taken against the deceased if he had survived may be taken against the legal representative in terms of section 159(2)(b) of the Act. 3. Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the legal representative of the deceased is for the purpose of the Act, deemed to be an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rathiya died on 12.10.2020. The assessee's Legal Heir Smt. Kanchan Kiran Sorathiya filed submissions during the assessment proceedings and show cause notice dated 06.04.2021 proposing addition of Rs. 12,44,42,825/- was issued and served upon the assessee. The deceased assessee was given notice upto 09.04.2021 to file his details and explanations. The Assessing Officer held that since the assessee did not file reply against show cause notice and no explanation was offered, therefore, addition of Rs. 12,44,42,825/- was made under Section 69B of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the Legal Heir of the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the Legal Heir of the assessee/assessee. 5. The Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formalities. The Ld. DR was confronted with the decision of Hon'ble Punjab And Haryana High Court in the case of Swaran Kanta vs. CIT, 176 ITR 291 which is in favour of the Revenue and held that the title of the Assessment Order which was not correctly worded would not make the Assessment Order invalid and the Assessment Order as passed by the Income Tax Officer was a valid assessment. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the decision of Hon'ble Punjab And Haryana High Court is on a slightly different footing and in that case during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee died and notice was issued to the Legal Heir of the deceased and in her presence the assessment was finalised. The Ld. AR further submitted that in the decision of Hon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e person who has carried out transaction. Ld. AR further submitted that letter for recovery of demand dated 27.01.2022 was also issued in the name of deceased assessee without mentioning about the Legal Heir. Notice for penalty proceedings under Section 274 was also issued in the name of deceased assessee without mentioning about the Legal Heir. The Assessing Officer has recognised Legal Heir only after CIT(A) order while passing appeal effect order under Section 250 of the Act dated 28.01.2022. The Ld. AR submitted that the decision of Punjab And Haryana High Court will not be applicable in assessee's case as the Assessing Officer has not directly acknowledged Smt. Kanchan Kiran Sorathiya as Legal Heir of late Shri Kirankumar Lalji Sorathi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Legal Heir only after CIT(A) has given order against the Revenue. The Ld. AR further submitted that the following decisions wherein assessment order in the name of deceased person/non-existent person is held to be invalid and non-curable under Section 292B of the Act. 1) PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, 107 Taxmann.com 375 2) Spice Infotainment Limited vs. CIT (2012) 247 CTR (Delhi HC) 500 3) T. Pilani S-463-HC-2019 (Madras) 4) Dimension Apparels Pvt. Ltd. TS-610-HC-2014 (Delhi) 5) Norton Motors TS-10-HC-2004 (P&H) 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is to note that the Ld. DR submitted that mentioning of the deceased assessee in the Assessment Order can be rectif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heir, the same cannot be curable under Section 292B of the Act. The Assessing Officer has consciously chose the name of the deceased assessee. In the eyes of law, if the assessee is deceased and Assessing Officer is very well aware about the same, then order has to be passed in the name of the Legal Heir of the deceased assessee. But the Assessing Officer chose otherwise and, therefore, this defect is not curable as later on notices for demand as well as for imposing of penalty was issued in the name of the deceased assessee and thus the Assessment Order itself becomes void-ab-initio. The CIT(A) has taken proper cognisance of the same and allowed the plea of the assessee and held the Assessment Order invalid. There is no need to interfere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
