Raman Kumar Aggarwal Vs ACIT /DCIT (ITAT Amritsar)
Summary: The appeal was preferred by the assessee against the order dated 18.09.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana for Assessment Year 2014-15. The principal challenge was to the framing of assessment under section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the name of a deceased person, which the assessee contended rendered the entire proceedings null and void. The Tribunal took this ground up first as it went to the root of the matter.
The original return of income was filed by Raman Kumar Aggarwal on 25.09.2014 declaring taxable income of Rs. 15,66,280/-. A search and seizure operation under section 132 was carried out in the case of J.R. Agro Group on 09.09.2015. The original search assessment was completed under section 153A read with section 143(3) on 28.12.2017 in the name of Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal for AY 2014-15. The assessee’s appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed on 30.11.2018 and the matter was thereafter taken to the Tribunal.
In the first round, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the Assessing Officer by order dated 23.09.2023. During the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal, Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal expired on 21.07.2022. The second round of proceedings commenced with notice under section 142(1) dated 23.09.2024, followed by letter dated 03.10.2024, show cause notice dated 21.10.2024 and letter dated 08.11.2024. According to the learned AR, all these notices were issued in the name of late Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal. The search assessment was ultimately completed under section 153A read with sections 144 and 254 on 29.11.2024 in the name of Raman Kumar Aggarwal, who had already expired on 21.07.2022.
The assessment was framed under section 144 because of non-cooperation by way of non-representation. However, the statement of facts before the CIT(A) categorically stated that Raman Kumar Aggarwal had already expired when the assessment was framed. The CIT(A), while addressing the issue, recorded that the plea that assessment had been framed against a deceased person was not tenable because the assessee was alive during the course of assessment and the present appeal had been validly pursued by the legal heir. The Tribunal observed that this demonstrated that the CIT(A) was aware both that the second-round assessment had been framed in the name of the deceased and that the appeal had been filed by the legal heir, yet proceeded to confirm the additions.
The Tribunal held that, as on the date of framing the second-round assessment, Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal was no longer existent because he had died on 21.07.2022. It therefore concluded that the search assessment framed in the name of the deceased person had no legs to stand in the eyes of law. In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal relied upon the decisions of the Delhi High Court in Vipin Walia vs ITO and Savita Kapila, Legal Heir of Late Sh Mohinder Paul Kapila vs ACIT, the Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT vs Prabhawati Gupta, the Kerala High Court in Shini Shajan vs PCIT, and the Gujarat High Court in Chandreshbhai Jayantibhai Patel vs ITO.
Cases Discussed
- Savita Kapila, Legal Heir of Late Sh Mohinder Paul Kapila vs ACIT Delhi, reported in 426 ITR 502 (Del)
- Vipin Walia vs ITO, reported in 382 ITR 19 (Del)
- CIT vs Prabhawati Gupta, reported in 231 ITR 188 (M.P.)
- Shini Shajan vs PCIT, reported in 180 taxmann.com 836
- Chandreshbhai Jayantibhai Patel vs ITO, reported in 413 ITR 276 (Guj.)
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AMRITSAR
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 18.09.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana [ herein referred to as’ ld. CIT(A)’] for Assessment Year 2014-15.
2. Vide ground No.2, the assessee is challenging the framing of assessment u/s 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in the name of dead person thereby rendering the entire proceedings null and void. This ground goes to the root of the matter and hence is taken up first for adjudication.
3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The original return of income was filed by the assessee Raman Kumar Aggarwal on 25.09.2014 declaring taxable income of Rs. 15,66,280/-. A search and seizure operation was carried out U/s 132 of the Act in the case of J.R. Agro Group on 09.09.2015. The original search assessment was completed U/s 153A of the Act r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2017 in the name of Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal for A.Y. 2014-15. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) which stood dismissed vide order dated 30.11.2018. The assessee preferred appeal before he Tribunal.
4. The Tribunal in the first round restored the appeal to the file of ld. Assessing Officer vide its order dated 23.09.2023. When the appeal was pending before the Tribunal, the assessee Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal expired on 21.7.2022. Thereafter, proceedings stood initiated in the second round vide notice U/s 142(1) of the Act on 23.09.2024 which was followed by letter dt. 03.10.2024, show cause notice dt 21.10.2024 and letter dated 08.11.2024. All these aforesaid notices according to ld. AR were issued in the name of late Sh Raman Kumar Aggarwal (deceased). The search assessment in the second round stood completed u/s 153A r.w.s. 144 and 254 dated 29.11.2024 in the name of Raman Kumar Aggarwal who was not in existence at all as on the date of passing of the order as he had expired already on 21.07.2022.
5. It pertinent to note that the assessment order was framed U/s 144 of the Act due to non-cooperation from the side of the assessee by way of non- representation. However, in the statement of facts filed before the ld. CIT(A), it has categorically been mentioned that Raman Kumar Aggarwal had already expired as on the date of framing of the assessment. The ld. CIT(A) in page 12 paragraph 6.2.1(ii) had addressed this issue by stating that “the plea of the assessee that assessment has been framed against a deceased person is not tenable, as the assessee was alive during the course of assessment, and the present appeal has been validly pursued by the legal heir”. This clearly goes to prove that that ld. CIT(A) was very much aware of the following facts: –
a) assessment in the second round has been framed in the name of deceased; and
b) Appeal has been filed by the legal heir of late Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal.
Despite this fact, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to pass the appellate order confirming the addition made in the re-assessment orders framed in the name of the deceased.
6. The above facts clearly prove that as on the date of framing of assessment in the second round of proceedings, Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal was not existent since he had already died on 21.07.2022. Hence, the search assessment framed in the name of the deceased person would have no legs to stand in the eyes of law. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Savita Kapila, Legal Heir of Late Sh Mohinder Paul Kapila vs ACIT Delhi reported in 426 ITR 502 (Del); Vipin Walia vs ITO reported in 382 ITR 19 (Del), Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs Prabhawati Gupta reported in 231 ITR 188 (M.P.), Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Shini Shajan vs PCIT reported in 180 taxmann.com 836 and decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Chandreshbhai Jayantibhai Patel vs ITO reported in 413 ITR 276 (Guj.).
7. In view of the above, the ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed and we hold the entire assessment proceedings for assessment year 2014-15 to be null and void. Since the entire assessment is quashed as void ab initio, the adjudication of other grounds became academic in nature and they are left to open.
8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.07.2026.
