Lalita Agarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
The appeals concern Assessment Years (AYs) 2011-12 to 2014-15, filed by the legal heir of the deceased assessee challenging reassessment notices and orders issued under Section 148 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The deceased, Shri Subhash Chandra Agarwal (PAN: AANPA3967D), passed away on 4.12.2014. Despite the death, the ITO (Investigation Wing)-7 issued queries and Section 148 notices in the name and PAN of the deceased for multiple AYs. Assessment orders were subsequently framed in the PAN of the deceased for AYs 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15.
The legal heir, Lalita Agarwal, informed the department of her husband’s death and submitted a copy of the death certificate. Separate assessments had been completed in her PAN for the same AYs with no income assessed against the deceased. The assessee argued that the reassessment notices and orders issued in the name of a deceased person were legally invalid, rendering them null and void. Reference was made to ITAT Delhi’s previous decision on identical facts for AYs 2008-09 to 2010-11, where similar appeals were allowed.
The Departmental Representative relied on the orders of lower authorities, which had sustained the reassessment.
The ITAT Delhi, after reviewing the facts and submissions, noted that issuance of notices under Section 148 to a deceased person does not confer valid jurisdiction for reassessment. The Tribunal relied on the Delhi High Court decision in Savita Kapila vs. ACIT (426 ITR 502, 16.07.2020), holding that reassessment notices must be addressed to a living assessee or legal representative. Following this precedent and considering the assessee’s previous successful appeals on identical grounds, the Tribunal quashed the reassessment orders for all five AYs.
