Court invalidates faceless assessment order against deceased, stresses procedural compliance

The court set aside the faceless assessment order passed against a deceased person, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance and due process in assessment proceedings. It ruled that the order was invalid as it did not follow mandatory procedures and directed a reassessment with proper consideration of materials and a hearing for legal heirs within three weeks. The judgment highlighted the necessity of adhering to legal requirements, especially in cases involving deceased individuals, and granted relief to the appellant by annulling the assessment order.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Faceless assessment order passed against a deceased person.
2. Validity of assessment order passed against a deceased person.
3. Jurisdiction and procedural compliance in assessment proceedings.

Issue 1: Faceless assessment order passed against a deceased person

The judgment begins by quoting the Hon'ble Supreme Court's observation regarding tax laws being made by the living to tax the living, not the dead. The case involved the appellant's deceased husband, who had a proprietorship business and filed an income tax return before passing away. The first respondent proceeded with the assessment and passed a faceless assessment order against the deceased. The appellant challenged this order through a writ petition.

Issue 2: Validity of assessment order passed against a deceased person

The appellant's counsel argued that the assessment order against the deceased husband was invalid as it did not follow mandatory procedures, including providing a draft assessment order and an opportunity for a personal hearing. The counsel contended that the order was a nullity in law. The standing counsel for the respondents defended the order, citing provisions that allow proceedings against a deceased person to continue against legal representatives. The court noted the mistake in passing the order against the deceased and emphasized the need for proper legal heir details.

Issue 3: Jurisdiction and procedural compliance in assessment proceedings

The court highlighted that an alternative statutory remedy does not bar a writ petition in certain circumstances, such as violations of fundamental rights, principles of natural justice, or lack of jurisdiction. It referenced legal principles stating that a challenge to jurisdiction remains valid even if subsequent orders have been passed. The court found that the assessment order against the deceased without following mandatory procedures was unsustainable. The judgment set aside the order and directed a reassessment with proper consideration of materials and a hearing for legal heirs within three weeks.

In conclusion, the court emphasized the importance of following due process in assessment proceedings, especially when dealing with cases involving deceased individuals. The judgment underscored the need for procedural compliance and granted relief to the appellant by setting aside the assessment order and ordering a reassessment with proper legal procedures.

---