Kandhasamy Amaravathy Vs ITO (Madras High Court)
Summary: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of W.P.(MD) No.20203 of 2026 filed by R.Ravindran as legal representative of deceased assessee Kandhasamy Amaravathy, challenging the notice dated 30.03.2026 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2022-23. The impugned notice, bearing DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2025-26/1088113881(1), was issued in the name of the deceased assessee. The writ petition was disposed of by Justice C.Saravanan at the admission stage by consent, after hearing both sides.
Kandhasamy Amaravathy died on 24.12.2022. On the same date, a return was filed on behalf of the deceased assessee. Thereafter, a notice under Section 133(6) was issued in the deceased assessee’s name on 09.05.2025. The petitioner responded on 20.06.2025 and informed the respondents about the death of the assessee. Despite this intimation, the impugned notice dated 30.03.2026 was issued in the name of the deceased assessee by invoking the machinery under Section 135A read with Section 148 of the Act.
The Court considered Section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which deals with legal representatives. Section 159(2) provides, among other things, that proceedings taken against the deceased before death may be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which they stood on the date of death, while proceedings which could have been taken against the deceased if he had survived may be taken against the legal representative. Section 159(3) further provides that the legal representative of the deceased shall, for the purposes of the Act, be deemed to be an assessee.
The Court specifically observed that if proceedings had already been initiated before the death of the assessee, they could be continued in the name of the deceased assessee in terms of Section 159(2). However, since the impugned notice itself had been issued in the name of the deceased assessee, the Court was inclined to remit the case to the first respondent for issuance of a fresh notice in the name of the legal representatives of the deceased assessee.
The Court also directed that the time taken between the date of the impugned order and a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the High Court’s order would stand excluded for computation of limitation under Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. After issuance of the fresh notice, the petitioner or the other legal representative whose name is mentioned in the fresh notice was directed to participate in the proceedings in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of without costs and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed. The Court did not finally adjudicate the underlying reassessment merits; the operative direction was to issue a fresh notice in the name of the legal representatives of the deceased assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Mr.J.Parekk Kumar, learned senior standing counsel for Income Tax, takes notice for the respondents.
2. By consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the time of admission, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned senior standing counsel for the respondents.
3. The petitioner is before this Court as against the impugned notice issued by the first respondent bearing DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2025-26/1088113881(1) dated 30.03.2026.
4. The writ petition has been filed by a legal representative of the deceased assessee, namely, Kandhasamy Amaravathy, who died on 24.12.2022. It is on the same date, return was also filed on behalf of the deceased assessee. Thereafter, a notice under Section 133(6) was issued in the name of the deceased assessee on 09.05.2025. The petitioner had responded to the same on 20.06.2025, wherein the details of the death of the deceased assessee has been informed to the respondents. Despite the same, the impugned notice has been issued in the name of the deceased assessee on 30.03.2026, which has been directly issued by invoking the machinery under Section 135A r/w Section 148 of the Act.
5. Section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 contemplates situation as to how proceedings have to be continued in the case of a diseased assessee.
“Legal representatives.
159. (1) Where a person dies, his legal representative shall be liable to pay any sum which the deceased would have been liable to pay if he had not died, in the like manner and to the same extent as the deceased.
(2) For the purpose of making an assessment (including an assessment, reassessment or recomputation under Section 147 of the income of the deceased and for the purpose of levying any sum in the hands of the legal representative in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1),
(a) any proceeding taken against the deceased before his death shall be deemed to have been taken against the legal representative and may be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which it stood on the date of the death of the deceased ;
(b) any proceeding which could have been taken against the deceased if he had survived, may be taken against the legal representative ; and
(c) all the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly.
(3) The legal representative of the deceased shall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed to be an assessee.
(4) Every legal representative shall be personally liable for any tax payable by him in his capacity as legal representative if, while his liability for tax remains undischarged, he creates a charge on or disposes of or parts with any assets of the estate of the deceased, which are in, or may come into, his possession, but such liability shall be limited to the value of the asset so charged, disposed of or parted with.
(5) The provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 161, section 162 and section 167, shall, so far as may be and to the extent to which they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this section, apply in relation to a legal representative.
(6) The liability of a legal representative under this section shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (4) and sub-section (5), be limited to the extent to which the estate is capable of meeting the liability.”
6. If the proceedings had been initiated already before the death of the deceased assessee, the proceedings could have been continued in the name of the deceased assessee, in terms of Section 159(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Though sub-section 3 to Section 159 states that the legal representative of the deceased shall for the purpose of this Act be deemed to be an assessee.
7. Since the notice has been issued in the name of the deceased assessee, I am inclined to remit the case back to the first respondent to issue a fresh notice in the name of the legal representatives of the deceased assessee.
8. The time taken between the date of the impugned order and a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order shall stand excluded for the purpose of computation of limitation under Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
9. After a fresh notice is issued, the petitioner or the other legal representative, whose name is mentioned fresh notice, shall participate in the proceeding in accordance with law.
10. The Writ Petition stands disposed of, accordingly. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
