Poonam Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Pursuant to a search conducted in March 2019, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 153A on 20.01.2020 in the name of the assessee, who had already expired in September 2019. Although a fresh notice under section 153A was later issued in January 2021 in the name of the legal heir, the assessment order referred only to the first notice issued to the deceased and even a subsequent notice under section 142(1) was again issued in the deceased’s name.
The Tribunal noted from the chronology of events that the assessment was effectively based on the invalid first notice to a dead person, and the second valid notice to the legal representative was neither relied upon nor properly incorporated in the assessment proceedings.
Relying on the Delhi High Court judgment in Savita Kapila v. ACIT, the Tribunal held that a notice issued in the name of a deceased person is a jurisdictional defect and void ab initio, and there is no obligation on the legal heir to intimate the death to the department.
Since the assessment was founded on an invalid notice to the deceased, the entire assessment under section 153A read with section 143(3) was quashed. Consequently, all other grounds on merits, including the addition under section 56(2)(vii), were rendered infructuous and left undecided.
The assessee’s appeal was allowed in full.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
