Facts of the
Case
The petitioner, Smt. Meenu Gupta, wife and legal
heir of late Sh. Vipin Gupta, challenged a notice dated 15 February 2024 issued
under Section 148A(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2020-21,
along with the consequential order under Section 148A(d) and notice under
Section 148, both dated 21 March 2024.
Late Sh. Vipin Gupta expired on 17 August 2019. His
return of income under Section 139(1) could not be filed by the legal
representatives. The impugned notice under Section 148A(b) was nevertheless
issued in the name of the deceased assessee and was served at his residential
address, where it was received by the petitioner.
The petitioner filed a reply intimating the death
of the assessee and submitted that the salary income referred to in the notice
had already suffered tax deduction at source under Section 192 of the Act.
Despite this, the Assessing Officer proceeded to pass an order under Section
148A(d) and issued notice under Section 148 in the name of the deceased.
Issues
Involved
Whether reassessment proceedings
initiated by issuing notices in the name of a deceased assessee are valid in
law.
Whether issuance of notice under
Sections 148A(b) and 148 to a dead person constitutes a jurisdictional defect.
Whether Section 159 of the
Income-tax Act applies where proceedings were not initiated during the lifetime
of the assessee.
Whether reassessment can be
initiated where the alleged income has already suffered TDS under Section 192.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The petitioner contended that issuance of notices
under Sections 148A(b) and 148 in the name of a deceased assessee renders the
entire reassessment proceedings void ab initio. It was argued that issuance of
a valid notice to a living assessee is a condition precedent for assumption of
jurisdiction.
It was further submitted that the alleged escaped
income comprised salary income received from Airports Authority of India, on
which tax had already been deducted at source. In view of Sections 204 and 205
of the Act, no demand could be raised either against the deceased or the legal
heir.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The Revenue contended that the impugned notices and
order were issued in accordance with the statutory framework governing reassessment
proceedings. It was argued that the reassessment was based on information
available on the Insight Portal and was legally sustainable.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition and
quashed the impugned notice under Section 148A(b), the order under Section
148A(d), and the notice under Section 148. The Court held that:
Issuance of notice under Section
148 to a correct and living person is a sine qua non for acquiring jurisdiction
to reopen an assessment.
A notice issued in the name of a
dead person is a substantive jurisdictional defect and not a mere procedural
irregularity.
Section 159 does not apply where
proceedings were not initiated during the lifetime of the assessee and the
legal representative did not step into his shoes.
Salary income on which tax has
already been deducted at source cannot form the basis of reassessment
proceedings.
The Court relied upon its earlier decision in Savita
Kapila v. ACIT and also referred to Chandresh Jayantibhai Patel v. ITO
to reiterate settled principles.
Important
Clarification
The judgment authoritatively clarifies that:
Reassessment proceedings
initiated in the name of a deceased assessee are void ab initio.
There is no statutory obligation
on legal heirs to intimate the death of the assessee to the Income-tax
Department.
Section 159 cannot be invoked
where proceedings were not pending during the lifetime of the assessee.
Where tax has already been
deducted at source on salary income, reassessment proceedings seeking to tax the
same income are unsustainable.
This decision reinforces jurisdictional safeguards
in reassessment proceedings and protects legal heirs from invalid reopening
actions initiated in the name of deceased assessees.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1770203482_SH.MEENUGUPTALEGALHEIROFLATESH.VIPINGUPTAVsASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCIRCLE671DELHIORS..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment