Notice For Reopening Of Assessment Against Dead Person Is Invalid: ITAT Quashes Re-Assessment Order
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that the notice for reopening of the assessment against the dead person is invalid. The two-member bench of Kul Bharat (Judicial Member) and Pradeep Kumar (Accountant Member) has observed that the Assessing Officer has accentuated the legal fallacy by continuing to proceed against the dead person by issuing notice...
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that the notice for reopening of the assessment against the dead person is invalid.
The two-member bench of Kul Bharat (Judicial Member) and Pradeep Kumar (Accountant Member) has observed that the Assessing Officer has accentuated the legal fallacy by continuing to proceed against the dead person by issuing notice under Section 143 (2) and Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act. The re-assessment order passed pursuant to invalid notices for the purposes of reopening the assessment and for assumption of jurisdiction for carrying out the assessment is bad in law and has no legal sanctity.
The assessee was a non-resident and she died on October 1, 2010. The information about her death, along with the death certificate, was submitted to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer acknowledged the receipt of a letter.
However, despite the fact that the assessee was dead and brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer, no notice was issued to the legal heir. The AO has framed the assessment in the name of legal heirs. The notice under Section 143(2) was issued in the name of the deceased. A notice under Section 142(1) was similarly issued in the name of the deceased after her death.
The legal heir of the deceased assessee contended that the re-assessment order passed in the name of the deceased person cannot be protected under any circumstances and thus needs to be quashed.
The court, while allowing the appeal, quashed the re-assessment order.
Case Title: Neelam Dhingra, (through husband and legal heir- Vinod Dhingra) Versus DCIT
Citation: I.T.A. No.4725/DEL/2017
Dated: 10.06.2022
Counsel For Appellant: CA R.S. Ahuja
Counsel For Respondent: Sr.D.R. Bhopal Singh