Case Law Details
ITO Vs Late Shri Gautham Chand Jain (ITAT Chennai)
The Chennai ITAT held that an assessment framed in the name of a deceased assessee without substituting the legal representative is void ab initio and without jurisdiction. The Tribunal reiterated that once the department is informed about the death of the assessee, proceedings must thereafter continue only against the legal representative in accordance with law.
In this case, the assessee had died on 22.07.2016 and his son had subsequently registered himself on the income-tax portal as legal representative. The legal heir had also specifically informed the department about the death while replying to notice u/s 142(1) and had furnished the death certificate online. Despite this, the AO completed assessment u/s 143(3) in the name of the deceased assessee itself.
The Tribunal relied upon the Supreme Court ruling in PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. and held that assessment orders passed against non-existent persons/entities are inherently without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. The ITAT observed that when the very assessment order lacks legal sanctity, the Revenue’s appeal arising from such invalid proceedings also cannot survive.
Accordingly, the Revenue’s appeal was dismissed in limine, with the Tribunal effectively affirming that jurisdictional defects relating to assessment on a dead person are not curable procedural irregularities.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 09.06.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2016-17.
2. There is a delay of 43 days in filing this appeal. The concerned Assessing Officer has filed an affidavit stating the reasons for belated filing of this appeal and prayed for the condonation of delay. On perusal of the reasons stated in the condonation petition, we are of the view that there is sufficient cause for late filing of this appeal and no latches can be attributed to the Department. Hence, we condone the delay in filing this appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.
3. At the very outset, we notice that assessment has been framed in the name of deceased assessee without substituting the name of the legal representative of the deceased. For the assessment year 2016-17, the late assessee had filed his return of income on 21.06.2016. The assessee had expired on
07.2016. Copy of the death certificate is placed on record at page 2 of the paper-book submitted by the assessee. After the death of the assessee, his son Shri Vinoth Kumar. G registered on the Income-tax portal as legal representative and filed the final return on behalf of the deceased assessee for the assessment year 2017-18 on 28.07.2017 (Acknowledgment No.958292020280717).
4. For the assessment year 2016-17, a notice u/s.142(1) of the Act was issued on 03.09.2018. In response, the legal representative of the deceased assessee submitted reply on 10.09.2018 informing the Department about the demise of the assessee and also furnished a copy of the death certificate along with other documents through online portal. Copy of reply submitted by the legal representative on 10.09.2018 is placed on record at pages 7 to 9 of the paper-book filed by the assessee. Thereafter, notices issued u/s.142(1) of the Act was replied by the legal representative. However assessment order was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 29.12.2018 in the name of the deceased assessee.
5. Against the said assessment order passed on 29.12.2018, the legal representative of the assessee preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA passed the impugned order on 09.06.2025 deleting the addition made by the AO. However, the FAA has also passed the said order in the name of the deceased assessee.
6. Aggrieved by the order of the FAA, the Revenue has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 43 days.
7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material of record. The assessment order has been passed on the deceased person without substituting the name of the legal representative of the deceased assessee, hence, the very assessment order is bad in law and same needs to be quashed in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., reported in (2019) 416 ITR 613. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had categorically held that when the assessment order is passed in the name of the non-existing entity, the same is without jurisdiction and has to be set aside. Therefore, when the assessment order has been completed in the name of deceased assessee, the appeal arising from the same does not have any legal sanctity. Therefore, the grounds raised by the Revenue are rejected.
8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 14thMay,2026 at Chennai.
Author Bio
