Surekha Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
The ITAT Bangalore held that an assessment order passed in the name of a deceased assessee is void ab initio when the statutory notice under Section 143(2) is issued in the name of the deceased and no fresh notice is issued to the legal representative.
In the present case, the assessee had filed the return declaring agricultural income. The assessee expired on 19-05-2019, but the Department subsequently issued notice u/s 143(2) on 28-09-2019 in the name of the deceased person and later passed an assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 15-04-2021 making an addition of ₹37.50 lakh by estimating 50% of the agricultural income as income from other sources.
Although the legal heir participated in the proceedings and furnished documents, the Tribunal observed that no notice u/s 143(2) was ever issued to the legal representative as required under Section 159(2)(b). The Tribunal held that issuance of notice to a dead person is invalid and the defect cannot be cured by Sections 292B or 292BB.
Relying on decisions of the Karnataka High Court, Bombay High Court, and the Supreme Court, the Tribunal held that a valid notice u/s 143(2) is a jurisdictional requirement and in its absence the Assessing Officer lacks authority to complete the assessment. Consequently, the entire assessment proceedings and the order passed u/s 143(3) were declared non-est and quashed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
