TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 836X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent order cannot be to be held to be valid in the eyes of law only for the reason that the legal heirs of the deceased assessee has not informed the Income Tax Department about the death of the assessee. It is a well established law that no assessment can be framed in the name of a person who has since expired. Any assessment order framed in the name of a deceased person without bringing the legal heirs of such person on record, is invalid in the eyes of law. As in the case of Pravinchandra A Shah [ 2023 (8) TMI 385 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ] held that reopening notice under section 148 issued upon deceased assessee was a nullity, therefore, consequential proceedings and orders passed thereon were to be quashed and set aside. Thus we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t price for the purpose of cost which was deducted from the sale consideration as determined by the stamp duty authority and thereby setting aside the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated 16.02.2015. The order passed by the ld. CIT is totally unjustified on facts as also in law therefore the same kindly be quashed. 4.0 The ld. Pr CIT further erred on facts in not properly considering the facts on record and appellant s submission. The order passed u/s 263 of the Act is therefore, totally unjustified on facts as also in law and may kindly be quashed. 5.0 Your Honor s appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any or more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of the appeal. 3. The brief facts o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... framing the assessment order, the Ld. Assessing Officer did not ascertain the cost and year of acquisition of the capital asset. Thus the assessment was made without proper inquiry and investigation. Therefore, as per the PCIT, assessment order was not only erroneous but also prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue as envisaged under Section 263 of the Income tax Act 1961. Further, during the course of 263 proceedings, it was claimed that the capital gain on the property was chargeable to tax in AY. 2003-04 as per provisions of Section 53A of the Transfer of Properties Act, 1882. Further, it has been claimed that in A.Y. 2003-04, the assessee had no taxable income, hence, no return of income was filed. In support, a notarized stamp pape ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order can be passed in the name of a deceased person. 7. In response, DR submitted that despite several notices issued to the assessee, no legal heir informed the Department that the assessee had since expired. Accordingly, the DR placed reliance on the observation made by PCIT in the 263 order. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. In the instant facts, we observe that the assessee had expired on 15.10.2013, while the assessment order was passed on 16.02.2015 in the name of the assessee. Therefore, evidently at the time when the assessment order was framed, the assessee had since expired. 9. This, therefore leads us to the question that whether the legal heir of the deceased person is under le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nn.com 616 (Gujarat) , the High Court held that reopening notice under section 148 issued upon deceased assessee was a nullity, therefore, consequential proceedings and orders passed thereon were to be quashed and set aside. Further, the following decisions also support the above proposition of law: - 'Pr. CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.' [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375/265 Taxman 515/416 ITR 613 (SC); - 'Krishnaawatar Kabra v. ITO' [2022] 140 taxmann.com 423 (Gujarat); - 'Rajender Kumar Sehgal v. ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.com 233/260 Taxman 412/414 ITR 286 (Delhi); - Sandeep Chopra v. Pr. CIT' [2023] 149 taxmann.com 225/292 Taxman 269 (Jharkhand); - 'SavitaKapila v. Asstt. CIT[2020] 118 taxmnann.com 46/27 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
