Case Law Details
Rekha. S Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Rekha. S v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) [W.P.No.35411 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.35374 of 2023 dated December 12, 2023] granted relief to the legal heirs of the Deceased by setting aside the GST Assessment Order issued against the Deceased on the ground that the Order came to be passed against the dead person, which is non-est in law.
Facts:
Mr. M.K. Girish (“the Deceased”) passed away on February 25, 2021. The Revenue Department (“the Respondent”) was informed through an online application on June 29, 2022, about the demise. Despite acknowledgment of the demise, FORM DRC-01A dated July 06, 2022, and FORM DRC-01 dated November 21, 2022 (“Impugned Notices”) were issued in the name of the Deceased. Subsequently, an Assessment Order (“Impugned Order”) dated March 01, 2023, was issued against the Deceased.
Rekha. S (“the Petitioner/Legal Heir”) contended that initiating proceedings against a dead person was legally untenable, seeking to set aside the Impugned Order. The Respondent suggested considering the Impugned Notices as applicable to the Petitioner while acknowledging the issuance of the Impugned Notices as issued in the name of the Petitioner.
Hence, the Petition was filed by the Petitioner to challenge the Impugned Notices and Impugned Order.
Issue:
Whether the GST Notices/ Order can be passed against the Deceased Person?
Held:
The Madras High Court in W.P.No.35411 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.35374 of 2023 held as under:
- Held that, the fact remains that the Impugned Order came to be passed against the dead person, which is non-est in law and hence, it is liable to be set aside. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that, the Petitioners shall consider the Impugned Notices issued by the Respondent as it is issued to them as on date.
- Directed that, the Petitioner to file a reply to the Impugned Notices within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Thereafter, directed the Respondent to pass appropriate orders after providing opportunities of personal hearing to the Petitioner. Hence, the Writ Petition was disposed of.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 01.03.2023 passed by the respondent.
2. Mr. T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondent. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased M.K.Girish, who was running business in the name of “M/s.M.K.M.& Sons”. The said M.K.Girish was passed away on 25.02.2021 and the same was intimated to the respondent by way of online application dated 29.06.2022.
4. Further, he would submit that under these circumstances, GST DRC-01A dated 06.07.2022 and GST DRC-01 dated 21.11.2022 was issued by the respondent in the name of deceased M.K.Girish. Thereafter, the aforesaid impugned assessment order was also passed by the respondent on 01.03.2023 against the dead person. Therefore, he would contend that the said assessment order is liable to be set aside, since the said proceedings were initiated against a dead person.
5. In reply, the learned counsel for the respondent would fairly submit that GST DRC-01A dated 06.07.2022 and GST DRC-01 dated 21.11.2022 was issued against the dead person. Further, he would submit that the said notices may be treated as notice to all the petitioners, who are the legal heirs of the M.K.Girish and the petitioners can file their reply to the said notices, thereafter, the respondent will pass appropriate orders after providing sufficient opportunities to the petitioners.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would accept the suggestion made by the learned counsel for the respondent. However, he would submit that since the assessment order was passed against the dead person, the same is liable to be set aside.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.
8. In view of the above, the fact remains that the impugned assessment order came to be passed against the dead person, which is non-est in law and hence, it is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the said impugned order dated 01.03.2023 is set aside.
9. This Court is of the considered view that the petitioners shall consider the notice issued by the respondent dated 06.07.2022 as a notice issued to them as on date. Thus, the petitioners are directed to file a reply to the said notice within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders after providing opportunities of personal hearing to the petitioner.
10. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. No cost.
*****
(Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)
Author Bio
