Case Law Details
Brief of the Case
Delhi High Court held In the case of Vipin Walia vs. ITO that the revenue was to initiate proceedings under Section 147 against the deceased Assessee for AY 2008-09. The limitation for issuance of the notice under Section 147/148 was 31st March 2015. On 27th March 2015, when the notice was issued, the Assessee was already dead. If the Department intended to proceed under Section 147, it could have done so prior to 31st March 2015 by issuing a notice to the LRs of the deceased. Beyond that date it could not have proceeded in the matter even by issuing notice to the LRs of the Assessee. Further, the decision relied upon by revenue in Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong v. Jai Prakash Singh (1996) 3 SCC 525 is clearly distinguishable on facts. The Court fails to understand how the above decision is of any help to the Revenue in the present case where the initial notice under Section 147/148 of the Act was issued to a dead person. The Revenue was unable to issue a notice to the LR of the deceased Assessee under Section 147/148 within the period of limitation. That would be a plain illegality and not a mere irregularity.
Facts of the Case
A notice under Section 148 dated 27th March 2015 was addressed by the Income Tax Officer to one Mr. Inder Pal Singh Walia, seeking to reopen the assessment for AY 2008-09. The above notice was returned unserved to the Department with the postal authorities endorsing on it the remarks “Addressee expired”. That was a correct statement by the postal authority since indeed Mr. Inder Pal Singh Walia had expired on 14th March 2015. In other words, the notice dated 27th March 2015 had been addressed to a dead person.
Contention of the Petitioner
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
