Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Smt. Devaki, is the widow and legal heir of Late Baladka Rama Naik Kotekar, proprietor of M/s. Ganesh Prasad Tours and Travels, who passed away on 06.01.2024. Despite this, an Order-in-Original bearing DIN No.20250257000000444B8C dated 04.01.2025 was issued against the deceased. The petitioner challenged this order before the Karnataka High Court, contending that proceedings and orders passed in the name of a person who had already died, without notice to the legal heirs, are void.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether adjudication proceedings culminating in an Order-in-Original passed against a person who had already died, without impleading the legal heirs, are valid in law.
  2. What remedy is available to the department where such an order is set aside — specifically, whether it may proceed afresh against the legal representatives.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned proceedings and order, having been passed against the petitioner's deceased husband, are illegal, void, invalid, non est and void ab initio.
  • Reliance was placed on a line of precedents in the income-tax context — including Sri. Late Someshwar Rao Chilukuri v. Income Tax Officer, Mrs. Vanitha Gopal Shetty v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Urmila Saxena v. Central Board of Direct Taxes, and Sumit Balkrishna Gupta v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax — holding that proceedings against a deceased person are void ab initio.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that there was no merit in the petition and that it was liable to be dismissed, without offering a substantive rebuttal on the deceased-person point.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court agreed that, the original assessee having expired on 06.01.2024, the impugned proceedings and order passed against him were clearly illegal, void, invalid, non est and void ab initio, applying the reasoning of the cited precedents.
  • The impugned Order-in-Original dated 04.01.2025 was set aside.
  • Liberty was reserved to the respondents to initiate appropriate action against the petitioner, subject to all just exceptions and in accordance with law.

Important Clarification

  • Adjudication proceedings and an Order-in-Original passed in the name of a taxpayer who had already died — without bringing the legal heirs on record — are non est and void ab initio, applying settled principles borrowed from income-tax jurisprudence equally to Central Tax/GST adjudications.
  • Setting aside such an order does not foreclose the revenue's remedy: the department retains liberty to initiate fresh proceedings against the legal representatives of the deceased, with proper notice, in accordance with law.

Sections Involved

  • Section 93, CGST Act, 2017 — special provisions regarding liability to pay tax in certain cases, including on the death of a person carrying on business (referenced by the underlying principle applied).
  • Principles of natural justice, requiring valid parties and notice before any adjudication order can bind an estate.

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the Assessee/legal heir. The Order-in-Original was set aside, with liberty reserved to the department to proceed afresh against the petitioner in accordance with law.

Case Details

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; WP No.29814 of 2025 (T-RES); Neutral Citation: 2025:KHC:49682; Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar; Date of Order: 28.11.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.