Sheela Devi (wife- legal heir of Vas Dev (deceased) Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi)
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed before us and case laws cited. Firstly, we consider it expedient to address ourselves on legality of show cause notice and consequent revisional order passed under Section 263 of the Act. The issue of validity of a notice and proceedings held subsequent thereto against a dead person is no longer res integra. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dharamraj vs. ITO (supra) has examined the issue in length and held that the notice issued against a death person is null and void and all consequent proceedings/orders being equally tainted are liable to be set aside.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed before us and case laws cited. Firstly, we consider it expedient to address ourselves on legality of show cause notice and consequent revisional order passed under Section 263 of the Act. The issue of validity of a notice and proceedings held subsequent thereto against a dead person is no longer res integra. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dharamraj vs. ITO (supra) has examined the issue in length and held that the notice issued against a death person is null and void and all consequent proceedings/orders being equally tainted are liable to be set aside.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the legal heir and wife of the deceased-assessee (Vas Dev) against the revisional order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad (‘PCIT’ in short) dated 28.03.2021 passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) whereby the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 15.11.2018 under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was sought to be set aside for reframing the assessment in terms of supervisory jurisdiction.
2. As per the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the revisional action of the PCIT whereby the Assessing Officer was directed to pass the assessment order denovo after making inquiries on the points set out revisional order. The assessee has challenged the assumption of jurisdiction by the PCIT under Section 263 of the Act on the ground that; (i) the initiation of revisional proceedings and consequential order under Section 263 of the Act is in the name of a deceased person is a nonest and unsustainable in the eyes of law (ii) the assessment order under revision is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and thus revisional commissioner was not competent to exercise revisional powers.
3. Briefly stated, return of the assessee under Section 143(3) r.w. Section 147 was assessed at Rs.1,35,682/-. Thereafter, the PCIT called for the assessment records and opined that the assessment order so passed is erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. A show cause notice dated 20.03.2021 was issued to the assessee seeking his response. It may be pertinent to reproduce the show cause notice issued by the PCIT for abbreviation of controversy.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
PCIT, Faridabad
