Facts of the Case

The petitioner, being the son of the deceased assessee, challenged reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice dated 30.03.2019 was issued in the name of the assessee who had already passed away on 14.01.2016.

Subsequent notices under Sections 142(1), 144, and penalty provisions were also issued in the name of the deceased. An assessment order dated 23.12.2019 was passed making additions for unexplained cash deposits.

The petitioner contended that all such proceedings were void as they were initiated against a dead person.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act in the name of a deceased person is valid in law.
  2. Whether reassessment proceedings can continue against a dead assessee without involving legal representatives under Section 159.
  3. Whether Sections 292B and 292BB can cure such jurisdictional defects.
  4. Whether availability of alternative remedy bars writ jurisdiction in such cases.

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The notice under Section 148 was issued to a person who was already deceased, rendering the entire proceedings void ab initio.
  • No notice was ever served upon the legal representatives.
  • Jurisdictional defect cannot be cured by procedural provisions.
  • Proceedings against a dead person are non-est in law and liable to be quashed.

Respondent’s Arguments

  • Notices were issued at the last known address available in the department’s database.
  • Notices were not returned undelivered initially, hence presumed served.
  • The legal heirs failed to inform the department about the death of the assessee.
  • The petitioner has an alternate remedy of appeal and writ petition should not be entertained.

Court’s Findings / Order

The Delhi High Court held:

  • Issuance of notice under Section 148 to a deceased person is null and void.
  • Such notice is a jurisdictional defect, not a procedural irregularity.
  • If the foundational notice is invalid, all consequential proceedings including assessment orders also become invalid.
  • Alternative remedy does not bar writ jurisdiction where proceedings are without jurisdiction.
  • Section 159 does not apply where proceedings were not initiated during the lifetime of the assessee.
  • Sections 292B and 292BB cannot cure the defect of issuing notice to a dead person.

Final Order:
The impugned notice dated 30.03.2019 and all consequential proceedings were set aside and the writ petition was allowed.

Important Clarifications by Court

  • Notice under Section 148 must be issued to a living person; this is a condition precedent for jurisdiction.
  • Legal heirs are not under any statutory obligation to inform the department about the death of the assessee.
  • Section 292B does not apply to cases where notice is issued to a dead person.
  • Section 292BB applies only to an assessee, not to legal representatives.
  • Proceedings initiated after death without invoking Section 159 are invalid. 

Link to download the order -https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/case_number_pdf/2022:DHC:230-DB/NAC17012022CW92272021_111245.pdf

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.